Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.posted.palinacquisition!news.posted.palinacquisition.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 09:28:37 -0500
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 07:28:37 -0700
From: Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.22) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/3.1.14
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: StringBuilder
References: <96f358c8-a024-40db-b60b-300186c2f813@o10g2000vby.googlegroups.com> <j41fik$3qb$1@news.albasani.net> <j52jgd$iij$1@dont-email.me> <vp7a77lp3e5oe4h79pnmv95vb4lu13spmc@4ax.com> <GeednbWNqODBGOjTnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@posted.palinacquisition> <j54841$92q$1@news.albasani.net>
In-Reply-To: <j54841$92q$1@news.albasani.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <XOWdncsx2fSInevTnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@posted.palinacquisition>
Lines: 26
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 50.46.118.188
X-Trace: sv3-07q9LLRs0Ry9aCXF6RrZ00B+YAAYhJj9KN1+m+BJnpmAhelF1QGPvi0Rhlv56lxhs/SSKcHXpI3DXhn!aU24oRAXW5iU7/CLRrY98AudzSSbGQsTrUpcTOp5DOum66ib5zk+CwhNw3UXvjbuQPyAkMIm6N4O!2PTy7YDuVGl6qwqVcrSm5ManMHQY8BEt+dis0yth0Lo=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iinet.com
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@iinet.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2538
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:8130

On 9/18/11 12:54 AM, Jan Burse wrote:
> Peter Duniho schrieb:
>
>> In any case, if Java does _not_ implement it that way, I suspect that's
>
> Well, I wouldn't say its a matter of *Java*. Its a matter
> of the given JDK how it is implementented. *Java* defines
> the contract but there are many implementations.

It's true, I use "Java" generically here.  So?

> [...]
> I guess it is more about performance tuning than removing
> bottlenecks. And any performance gain is only seen in
> programs that make heavy use of StringBuilder. Such
> measurements have already been done over and over. See
> for example (not exactly measurig toString()):
>
> +=: 546 ms
> StringBuilder, default initial capacity: 30ms
> StringBuilder, exact initial capacity: 10ms
>
> http://christian.bloggingon.net/archive/2008/09/06/performance-vorteile-bei-der-verwendung-von-stringbuilder.aspx

Such measurements are meaningless out of context.  The point is how much 
time is spent in StringBuilder _for a specific application_.