Path: csiph.com!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Event overhead, does it matter?
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:36:43 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <nm5jm0$5dk$1@dont-email.me>
References: <9c586a05-dbbd-4ebc-b61c-a53269421858@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 14:36:48 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="2d081e2f7155c28005d4472f67c2f43d"; logging-data="5556"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19V+eM1jGD/qulxdWtTXBNK"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
In-Reply-To: <9c586a05-dbbd-4ebc-b61c-a53269421858@googlegroups.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:BvYJfj5516qa8/llnBXCbVaJ0/E=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:34876

On 7/13/2016 9:51 AM, Eric Douglas wrote:
> Is one method more efficient (speed, memory) or is it just a matter of personal preference?
>
> Method 1:
> [... one FocusListener shared by two components ...]
>
> Method 2:
> [... two FocusListeners, one for each component ...]

     One method is (probably) more efficient.  Performing measurements
to discover which is left as an exercise for the reader.  (I suspect
that measuring the memory footprints might be comparatively simple,
while measuring the execution speeds might be next to impossible.  I
also suspect that neither set of measurements would be worth while.)

     As a matter of style, I'd vote for Method 2 on the grounds that
it's more easily modifiable if/when you decide to change the GUI.

-- 
esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid
"Don't be afraid of work. Make work afraid of you." -- TLM