- From: Joseph Kesselman <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 13:16:52 -0500
- To: "'www-dom@w3.org'" <www-dom@w3.org>
>I was hoping that another person who also commented on this method was going >to benchmark any difference in performance between reusing a result set and >passing null consistently. My instinct is that any performance gain is >negligible. The gain -- or loss -- is going to be highly implementation dependent, based on how much overhead that particular code (and the platform it's running on) imposes on creating a new instance of the object. There may be a good reason for letting applications pass this parameter in as an optimization hint -- but also a good reason for letting the implementation decide whether accepting that hint makes sense. So I agree that the wording should be "cannot or choses not to", or something along those lines, and that users should always never assume that the object passed in will be the same as the one which is returned. ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman / IBM Research
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2002 13:18:02 UTC