Am 27.04.2011 02:34, schrieb David Holmes:
Hi Stuart,
Actually my comments more a response to Remi's assertion that clone should have been used instead,
without giving any technical rationale as to why clone would be better, and so much better that it
warranted Lance changing the code.
Personally I think we should be steering people to Arrays.copyOf for all their
array copying needs.
Hm, why?
clone() is effectively legacy code.
What does that mean?
I prefer clone():
- less to type
- better to read, especially in looong code lines, e.g. as method call argument
- in-advanced reader potentially has less need to refer the doc
- potentially faster, at least in interpreter and C1?
-Ulf
BTW: Did you answer to the wrong thread (see attached screen shot) ? That was the reason why I came
aware about this post ;-)
