Dali,
I was looking at this function in String.java:
private static StringBuffer decodeBytes(byte[] bytes, int offset,
int len, ByteToCharConverter encoding) {
StringBuffer sbuf = new StringBuffer(len);
char[] out = new char[512];
int outlen = encod
Am Mon, 28 Aug 2000 schrieb Artur Biesiadowski:
> And why exactly default converter could not be cached and same instance
> used for all conversions ? I think it is stateless class, so it should
> be safe to enter same object method from various threads with all state
> on stack.
It depends on
Godmar Back wrote:
> It is not stateless; it keeps track of not converted characters/bytes
> if there are any left. See the carry/flush methods.
>
> The converter only converts 512 bytes at a time (see String.decodeBytes).
> Now just why the converter does that, I don't know. It's not immedi
>
>
> Godmar Back wrote:
>
> [...] Every call results in a new
> > converter object being newinstanced, just to convert a bunch of bytes.
> > (The new converter was one of the changes done to make the
> > charset conversion thread-safe.)
> [...]
>
> And why exactly default converter could n
Hi Godmar,
sorry for the delay, but I was on holidays last week, and away from my
mail.
Am Sam, 19 Aug 2000 schrieben Sie:
> From what I understand, and someone correct me if I'm wrong,
> there shouldn't be any reason not to include the change you suggest -
> if someone implements it, of course
Godmar Back wrote:
[...] Every call results in a new
> converter object being newinstanced, just to convert a bunch of bytes.
> (The new converter was one of the changes done to make the
> charset conversion thread-safe.)
[...]
And why exactly default converter could not be cached and same in
Hi,
If anybody can tell me how JVM interacts with particaular platform.
What are the interfaces and how it exactly happening.
Thanks.
Rao SPB.
