Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #22554

Re: simple StringBuilder proposal

Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Date	2013-02-26 13:32 -0800
References	<qa8pi8tgm6kpbcn19l69rfvbclio6spivt@4ax.com> <kginuf$5s2$1@dont-email.me> <bc630117-b6e4-4e0f-8b37-2466eafe54fc@googlegroups.com> <kgivt2$n24$1@dont-email.me>
Message-ID	<aad282c7-97ee-4737-99ec-1320e248e884@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject	Re: simple StringBuilder proposal
From	Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>

Show all headers | View raw

markspace wrote:
> Lew wrote:
>> Java already has a shorthand for that:
>>    String s = "<input name=\"cx\" type=\"hidden\" value=\""
>>                + cseAccount + ":" + cseCode +  "\">\n";
> 
> This requires that the compiler actually create a second StringBuilder. 

That's what HotSpot is for, right?

>   This is not efficient.  What Roedy is saying is that given an existing 
> StringBuilder object, he wants to be able to invoke multiple #append() 
> calls with out having to spell out each one.

Okay, if that is enough of a hassle, and the "inefficiency" of a second StringBuilder 
is really a concern, then you write the method yourself.

The only inefficiency I thought was operating was programmer mindspace efficiency.

Worrying about a second StringBuilder argument is bullshit if you don't have to see it.

It's not like 'StringBuilder#append()' is super-"efficient", now is it? It's gotta convert things 
using 'toString()' (oh, hey, there are a few extra objects there anyway, huh?), grow arrays, 
and do all kinds of stuff where having a second instance might not even be noticeable.

>> It is not the job of the API to provide every conceivable cover method for
>> every conceivable combination of use cases.
> 
> This is a point.  I think that the varagrs method might be notably 
> inefficient in many cases, as primitives would be autoboxed.  However, 

There's that strange notion of efficiency again. Primitives are parsed into a String 
rep for 'append()' anyway, are they not?

> it would not hurt to actually investigate this and determine how much 
> and how often the autoboxing becomes an issue.  That investigation I'll 
> leave to the concerned parties, however.

And how much additional 'StringBuilder' objects become an issue, and with what 
frequency in the programmer community to be worth handling.

I aver that in the end the String '+' operator is fine. Forget micro-optimizing the 
StringBuilder. A difference that makes no difference is no difference.

-- 
Lew

Thread

simple StringBuilder proposal Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-02-26 03:53 -0800
  Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2013-02-26 15:15 +0000
    Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-02-27 10:25 -0800
    Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-02-27 10:30 -0800
      Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2013-02-28 08:30 +0000
        Re: simple StringBuilder proposal markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-02-28 07:54 -0800
  Re: simple StringBuilder proposal markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-02-26 08:31 -0800
    Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-26 10:33 -0800
      Re: simple StringBuilder proposal markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-02-26 10:47 -0800
        Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2013-02-26 13:29 -0600
          Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2013-02-26 12:08 -0800
        Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-26 13:32 -0800
          Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-02-27 10:33 -0800
        Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-02-26 22:53 +0100
          Re: simple StringBuilder proposal markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-02-26 15:54 -0800
            Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-03-01 07:35 +0100
      Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2013-02-27 10:31 -0800
        Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-02-28 05:14 +0100
  Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-02-26 09:41 -0800
  Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-02-26 20:21 +0100
    Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-02-26 23:07 +0100
      Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-02-27 00:09 +0100
        Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-02-26 15:19 -0800
          Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2013-02-27 09:34 -0700
            Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-02-27 19:18 +0100
              Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-27 19:56 -0500
                Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-02-28 10:19 +0100
                Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-28 08:16 -0500
                Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2013-02-28 16:40 -0700
                Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-28 18:51 -0500
            Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-27 20:01 -0500
  Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2013-02-26 22:03 +0100
    Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2013-02-26 22:04 +0100
  Re: simple StringBuilder proposal Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-02-27 03:47 +0100
    FastCat 'performance' (was: simple StringBuilder proposal) Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-02-27 18:16 +0100
      Re: FastCat 'performance' markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-02-27 09:58 -0800
        Re: FastCat 'performance' Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-02-27 19:31 +0100
          Re: FastCat 'performance' Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-02-27 20:00 +0100
            Re: FastCat 'performance' Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-02-27 20:41 +0100
              Re: FastCat 'performance' Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-02-27 12:38 -0800
                Re: FastCat 'performance' Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-02-27 21:58 +0100
                Re: FastCat 'performance' Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-02-27 13:32 -0800
                Re: FastCat 'performance' Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-27 13:42 -0800
                Re: FastCat 'performance' Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-02-27 13:44 -0800
                Re: FastCat 'performance' Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-02-27 22:51 +0100
                Re: FastCat 'performance' Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-02-28 05:19 +0100
                Re: FastCat 'performance' Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-02-28 13:09 +0100
                Re: FastCat 'performance' markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-02-27 13:57 -0800
                Re: FastCat 'performance' Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-02-27 15:23 -0800
                Re: FastCat 'performance' Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-02-27 18:52 -0500
                Re: FastCat 'performance' Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-03-01 17:26 +0100
      Re: FastCat 'performance' Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-02-27 21:00 +0100
      Re: FastCat 'performance' (was: simple StringBuilder proposal) Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2013-03-27 10:17 +0100

csiph-web