On 12/30/21 16:12, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
Would it be useful to have some kind of an immutable array in Java language
which works in the same way as ordinary array except it is not to
possible to change
its values after creation?
Yes. https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/8261007
--
Andrew Haley
> On Dec 24, 2021, at 2:46 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Are you saying that new would always create a new object but the GC might
>> merge multiple instances of String into a single instance?
>
> About jvm's string optimizations, jvm may make different string
> objects with the same c
Hello,
the simple answer is that
new String(...) == new String(...)
*never* evaluates to true )it might throw, though), whatever
constructors you are using and whatever arguments you pass to to them.
Some garbage collectors *might* de-duplicate the underlying arrays (but
you cannot te
[email protected]>
Subject: Re: a quick question about String
new String() always creates a new instance.
Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
Von: core-libs-dev im Auftrag von
Alan Snyder
Gesendet: Thursday, December 23, 2021 6:59:18 PM
An:
st partly why the
> > >> constructors on soon-to-be value objects are deprecated; they become
> > >> meaningless. The other is that if the presumption is that we should
> > >> always intern new Strings, I must disagree. Pooling takes time and
> > mem
cide if this is appropriate
>>> in their situation. Of course, the GC system seems to be capable of
>>> stepping in in some incarnations, which adds something of a counterexample,
>>> but that is, if I recall, configurable.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 23,
in their situation. Of course, the GC system seems to be capable of
> >> stepping in in some incarnations, which adds something of a
> counterexample,
> >> but that is, if I recall, configurable.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 2:53 PM Xe
, which adds something of a counterexample,
>> but that is, if I recall, configurable.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 2:53 PM Xeno Amess wrote:
>>
>>> never should，as Object can be use as lock.
>>>
>>> XenoAmess
>>> ___
use as lock.
>>
>> XenoAmess
>>
>> From: core-libs-dev on behalf of
>> Bernd Eckenfels
>> Sent: Friday, December 24, 2021 5:51:55 AM
>> To: alan Snyder ; core-libs-dev <
>> [email protected]
enfels.net
> > ________
> > Von: core-libs-dev im Auftrag von
> > Alan Snyder
> > Gesendet: Thursday, December 23, 2021 6:59:18 PM
> > An: core-libs-dev
> > Betreff: a quick question about String
> >
> > Do the public constructors of String actually do what their documentation
> > says (allocate a new instance), or is there some kind of compiler magic
> > that might avoid allocation?
> >
> >
>
> --
> Simon Roberts
> (303) 249 3613
f of
> Bernd Eckenfels
> Sent: Friday, December 24, 2021 5:51:55 AM
> To: alan Snyder ; core-libs-dev <
> [email protected]>
> Subject: Re: a quick question about String
>
> new String() always creates a new instance.
>
> Gruss
> Bernd
> --
> http:/
never should，as Object can be use as lock.
XenoAmess
From: core-libs-dev on behalf of Bernd
Eckenfels
Sent: Friday, December 24, 2021 5:51:55 AM
To: alan Snyder ; core-libs-dev
Subject: Re: a quick question about String
new String() always creates a new
new String() always creates a new instance.
Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
Von: core-libs-dev im Auftrag von Alan
Snyder
Gesendet: Thursday, December 23, 2021 6:59:18 PM
An: core-libs-dev
Betreff: a quick question about String
Do the public
Do the public constructors of String actually do what their documentation says
(allocate a new instance), or is there some kind of compiler magic that might
avoid allocation?
14 matches
Mail list logo
