<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/14/16 12:19 PM, Cantor, Scott
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:E78F2FC3-D504-470A-A8CC-EECBBF0FE2C7@osu.edu"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 9/14/16, 12:18 PM, "dev on behalf of Tom Zeller" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:dev-bounces@shibboleth.netonbehalfoftzeller@dragonacea.biz"><dev-bounces@shibboleth.net on behalf of tzeller@dragonacea.biz></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> > I don't think we compile with debug info?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> Turns out we do (set maven-compiler-plugin debug to true in the parent-v3 POM).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Oh. Dunno if that's normal.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Ah. That was the other thing I was meaning to ask and/or look into
re: the c: namespace usage of param names. When I first saw that, I
was mildly surprised that that even worked. I always kind of
thought that ctor and method parameter *names* weren't included in
the byte code by default. You only got them with debug turned on.
That may not be correct at all. However, I wonder if the c:name
ctor stuff still works if debug is turned off. If not, then that's
another reason why that seems unwise to me personally.<br>
<br>
Aside from that: Looks like debug is also turned on in the v2
parent. So I guess we've been doing this as SOP for a long time. I
wasn't aware of this. Does anyone remember why we did that? I just
wonder if we are incurring any bytecode size or performance
penalties, etc for building with debug=true.<br>
<br>
Just turning it off, though, might be risky, obviously. So not
saying we should anytime soon. Just wondering about the reasons,
and tradeoffs. <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:E78F2FC3-D504-470A-A8CC-EECBBF0FE2C7@osu.edu"
type="cite">
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>