Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TheGeneral" data-source="post: 471662" data-attributes="member: 73182">Great, then make it a struct.Actually, no. The data has already been received (At least I really hope). As the message has a prefixed length + header thus I assume that IClientMessage contains all the bytestream bytes already.Implementation is for [USER=72299]@Damien[/USER] to decide. The [ICODE]Invoke()[/ICODE] method is not slow. [ICODE]GetConstructor()[/ICODE] is (relatively!) slow though you could cache the result of that at startup. Then once you've got Invoke, its the same speed as a regular constructor call. If you're already worrying about performance at this time, and if the decision now is going to permanently affect your whole code base, then you're doing it wrong as it would indicate that it is not easy to refactor or replace / substiture parts of your code. Also I think he is already using the Activator anyways (or he has to re-use the packet instances which I certainly hope he isn't doing...)If you're really worried about compile time, use code generators to generate the code for you.Shouldn't really matter. You could just call the method with a bunch of data wrapped in an [ICODE]IClientMessage[/ICODE] and observe the result. You just don't have a specific object and its own logic behavior, which you just said it doesn't need, to possibly affect the result. [ICODE]1 + 1 [/ICODE] is pretty static to me and could be tested too. Could do something along the lines of:[CODE]/// Probably has some lookup table of header / packet type (IEventArgs) somewhere I assume.var packetDefinitions = new Dictionary&lt;ushort, Type&gt;();var factories = packetDefinitions.ToDictionary(kvp =&gt; kvp.Key,&nbsp; kvp =&gt; kvp.Value.GetConstructor(new[] { typeof(IClientMessage) }));var packetInstance = factories[4000].Invoke(message);[/CODE]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TheGeneral, post: 471662, member: 73182"] Great, then make it a struct. Actually, no. The data has already been received (At least I really hope). As the message has a prefixed length + header thus I assume that IClientMessage contains all the bytestream bytes already. Implementation is for [USER=72299]@Damien[/USER] to decide. The [ICODE]Invoke()[/ICODE] method is not slow. [ICODE]GetConstructor()[/ICODE] is (relatively!) slow though you could cache the result of that at startup. Then once you've got Invoke, its the same speed as a regular constructor call. If you're already worrying about performance at this time, and if the decision now is going to permanently affect your whole code base, then you're doing it wrong as it would indicate that it is not easy to refactor or replace / substiture parts of your code. Also I think he is already using the Activator anyways (or he has to re-use the packet instances which I certainly hope he isn't doing...) If you're really worried about compile time, use code generators to generate the code for you. Shouldn't really matter. You could just call the method with a bunch of data wrapped in an [ICODE]IClientMessage[/ICODE] and observe the result. You just don't have a specific object and its own logic behavior, which you just said it doesn't need, to possibly affect the result. [ICODE]1 + 1 [/ICODE] is pretty static to me and could be tested too. Could do something along the lines of: [CODE]/// Probably has some lookup table of header / packet type (IEventArgs) somewhere I assume. var packetDefinitions = new Dictionary<ushort, Type>(); var factories = packetDefinitions.ToDictionary(kvp => kvp.Key, kvp => kvp.Value.GetConstructor(new[] { typeof(IClientMessage) })); var packetInstance = factories[4000].Invoke(message); [/CODE] [/QUOTE]

Verification

Reply to thread

Connect with us

Newest members