On 05/26/2012 12:09 AM, Mike Duigou wrote:
On May 25 2012, at 06:57 , Rémi Forax wrote:
Hi Mike, Hi Alan, Hi all,
in my opinion, EMPTY_STRING_VALUE is a premature optimization,
the idea is, I think, to avoid to create an empty char but if you want to do
that,
it's better to do that in StringBuilder.toString() to avoid to create the
String at all.
I have removed most of the use of EMPTY_STRING_VALUE. It remains for the empty
constructor only.
I may be wrong but this constructor is used rarely
so for me it's like you add one static field that will be never used.
[...]
Recently, _getChars(char[], int) was replaced by
getChars(char[],int). It was a stupid change because now
one can think that getChar(char[], int) and getChar(int,int,char[],int)
do the same things. but getChat(char[],int) don't do any bounds check.
So concat() and toCharArray() doesn't do any bound check !
I don't see where either of them need to do any checking.
duh, sorry, I've forgotten the basics. You're right.
toCharArray() should use Arrays.copyOf()
Done.
Overloads of encode in StringCoding are in my opinion not necessary
because each method is called once.
Reasonable. I opted not to add the 3rd variant ([] count) because it wasn't
used. I've reverted to using the 3 param version.
So this doesn't really share code
but just add one level to the depth of the call stack.
cheers,
Rémi
regards,
Rémi
