Review Request CR#7118743 : Alternative Hashing for String with Hash-based Maps [private fields] (original) (raw)

Vitaly Davidovich vitalyd at gmail.com
Fri May 25 22:36:27 UTC 2012

Agreed on JDK code, but since accessors are also generated for access to outer class' private fields/methods from inner class, wouldn't want people to increase visibility of those fields/methods just to get rid of the accessors in their own code thinking that there are serious problems associated with them.

Anyway, we're in agreement. :)

Sent from my phone On May 25, 2012 6:18 PM, "Rémi Forax" <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

On 05/26/2012 12:09 AM, Vitaly Davidovich wrote:

Yes, methods/constructors as well - I should've pointed that out but only answered the field question that was originally asked. Valid points on metadata and stack pollution, although a bit pedantic for real code :). given that this code is in java.lang, thus use by millions, I have no problem to agree that when I review this kind of code, I switch myself in pedandic-mode. Thanks cheers, Rémi Sent from my phone On May 25, 2012 6:03 PM, "Rémi Forax" <forax at univ-mlv.fr <mailto:_ _forax at univ-mlv.fr>> wrote: On 05/25/2012 11:50 PM, Vitaly Davidovich wrote: This is specific to private fields in inner classes -

and methods and constructors java allows access to them from the outer class, but the JVM doesn't so javac generates synthetic accessor methods for them. Don't think it's a problem for JIT compiler though as it should inline them. yes, there are unconditionally inlined so performance is not the problem. The issues are more that the compiler generates unnecessary code, unnecessary class metadata, stack pollution and stacktrace pollution too. Rémi Sent from my phone On May 25, 2012 5:23 PM, "Ulf Zibis"<Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de_ _<mailto:Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de>> wrote: Am 25.05.2012 22 tel:25.05.2012%2022:30, schrieb Jeff Hain: Hello. In HashMap, the class Holder should not declare the static final fields 'private' because the compiler will generate an accessor in that case, I wasn't aware that making fields private could have a downside (other than making them non-visible). Could you, or anyone, please give (a link to) more info about this? I'm interested too. -Ulf

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list