-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 155
Comments
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Years ago was in our company made some internal fork based on Batik 1.8. We want switch back to OSS official version. It was back-ported some changes from newers Batik to our 1.8 to be able use JDK9+ but from overall we want use official OSS in future.
As original developer isn't in our company some years we don't know what all was done. He committed state after changes not the original state at first:( We know only that we had performance and memory problems.
We tried to compare official 1.8 with our 1.8.
One probably usefull change was this migration from StringBuffer to StringBuilder.