[antlr-interest] On trees and JavaBeans, part 2: tree creation

[Scott Stanchfield]

> > > The trouble is there are extra objects to collect. More 
> objects == 
> > > more
> > 
> > You miss the point.
> 
> Yes he does. A TreeModel-style abstraction isn't an 
> alternative to the Carrier/Payload model. It is a façade that 
> allows one to use Carrier/Payload or any other model one 
> cares to implement.

I assume you mean Loring missed the point? Sometimes the indentation is
weird...

This is exactly what I propose. Make the code that walks the carrier/payload
combo implement ASTModel as the DefaultASTModel in ANTLR.

That allows folks to use carrier/payload if they want, or completely replace
the carrier/payload system with their own tree navigation. 

> > There is less manipulation of data
> > pointers with Payloads implemented as objects distinct from 
> Carriers 
> > when doing significant manipulations.  Objects created and 
> destroyed 
> > are homogeneous, which places less stress on the garbage collector 
> > resulting in faster creation times and fewer compactions.  And, for 
> > platforms that do not have efficient garbage collectors, releasing 
> > Carriers back to a CarrierFactory is possible.
> 
> Indeed.

But not necessary.

Pooling is nice, but adds a *ton* of complexity and potential bugs
(especially b/c it's way too easy to forget to release loaned objects,
resulting in a leak...)

It’s much better to not have to create those extra unnecessary objects in
the first place.

Later,
-- Scott