sorry, I take that back. I don't want String or CharSequence to assume any threading model. It is up to the responsibility of the client of the class to know how it's being used and to treat it accordingly. There are a number of classes in the JDK that are broken because they over-reached.
Regards, Kirk On 2012-03-01, at 4:27 PM, Carl Jokl wrote: > In that case then it may be better to live with the immutability and > the performance and memory impact of that. > > On Mar 1, 3:23 pm, Kirk Pepperdine <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 2012-03-01, at 4:17 PM, Carl Jokl wrote: >> >>> Doesn't the StringBuilder use it? >> >> part of the same problem.. Pattern.matcher() uses it. >> >> >> >>> It might push some more responsibility on to calling code when passing >>> a CharSequence into a method that is not thread safe. >> >> hummm, encapsulation is broken >> >> Kirk > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Java Posse" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
