Am 23.10.2009 17:51, Mark Reinhold schrieb:
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:10:35 +0200
From: Rémi Forax <fo...@univ-mlv.fr>

Le 23/10/2009 03:53, Joe Darcy a écrit :
Following up on this, what is the exact revised proposal?

In java.lang.String:

   public static String join(String separator, Iterable<?> objects);
   public static String join(String separator, Object[] objects);
   public static String join(String separator, Object first, Object... rest);

with analogous methods in StringBuffer and StringBuilder return that type,
respectively, instead of String?
I don't know. In my opinion, the main problem with join specified using
static methods is that split is not currently specified as a static
method.  Because join is the dual of split, one could find the usage of
static methods weird.

I agree.  The join methods should be instance methods, not static methods.


Hm, but of what object. The result of the join method should be the object, we are talking about, but it doesn't exist in advance, so only a constructor could serve those needs.
We also have the pair:
   public static String copyValueOf(char[] data)
   public char[] toCharArray()

-Ulf


Reply via email to