Looks fine. Personally I would prefer the "canonicalized/real" name
"ISO-8859-1" though.
-Sherman
On 4/10/14 7:57 AM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
On Apr 10, 2014, at 3:27 AM, Ulf Zibis <ulf.zi...@cosoco.de> wrote:
Correction ...
Am 10.04.2014 12:03, schrieb Ulf Zibis:
Hi Chris,
Am 10.04.2014 11:04, schrieb Chris Hegarty:
Trivially, you could ( but of not have to ) use
java.nio.charset.StandardCharsets.ISO_8859_1 to avoid the cost of String to
CharSet lookup.
In earlier tests Sherman and I have found out, that the cost of initialization
of a new charsets object is higher than the lookup of an existing object in the
cache.
And it's even better to use the same String instance for the lookup which was
used to cache the charset.
It's not about the cached charset, but about the cached charsets de/encoder,
compare:
StringCoding.decode(String charsetName, byte[] ba, int off, int len)
StringCoding.decode(Charset cs, byte[] ba, int off, int len)
So from all this I infer that the change is OK as-is.
Correct?
Thanks,
Brian
