Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #8485
| From | Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 |
| Date | 2011-10-02 20:26 +0200 |
| Organization | albasani.net |
| Message-ID | <j6aad8$7he$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <j67svg$7om$1@dont-email.me> <j682df$9ve$1@dont-email.me> <16954967.979.1317524784002.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prng5> <j69dh0$qht$1@dont-email.me> <32945439.611.1317569831219.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prni6> |
Lew schrieb:
> There's a difference between "no information" and "information that
> there is no information". The latter tells you something, at least.
My original question was: How can I force an exception to not
record some stack frame list at all.
One proposed solution so far was pre-allocating exceptions
from a call site with a few stack frames. Eventually also
calling the following method on the pre-allocated exception:
setStackTrace(new StackTraceElement[0]);
So as to even free the stack trace that was allocate from the
call site with only a few stack frames. The above method is
available since JDK 1.4.
What about calling setStackTrace() just after the new and before
the throw. This would only give a space advantage but not a
time advantage.
Any other suggestions?
Bye
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-30 15:57 +0200
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-10-01 13:27 +0300
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-10-01 13:22 +0200
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-01 09:10 -0700
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-10-01 20:31 +0300
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-10-01 20:02 +0200
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-01 12:21 -0700
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-10-01 22:04 +0200
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-10-01 16:24 -0400
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-10-01 23:14 +0200
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-10-01 17:28 -0400
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-10-01 23:45 +0000
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-10-02 00:58 +0300
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-10-02 02:04 +0200
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-01 20:06 -0700
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-10-02 13:14 +0300
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-02 08:37 -0700
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-10-02 20:26 +0200
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-10-02 17:51 -0400
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-10-03 01:32 +0200
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-10-01 20:19 +0300
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-10-01 20:04 +0200
Re: Avoid creating a stacktrace prior to JDK 1.7 Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-10-01 21:15 +0300
csiph-web