Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #8125

Re: StringBuilder

Show all headers | View raw

Eric Sosman schrieb:
> I don't have old Java source, but I do have an old O'Reilly
> book ("Java In a Nutshell, 2nd Edition, Covers Java 1.1, by David
> Flanagan") that states
>
> The StringBuffer.toString() method does not copy the internal
> array of characters; instead it shares that array with the
> new String object, and makes a new copy for itself only when
> further modifications are made to the StringBuffer object.
>
> Assuming the author was correct, it follows that the implementation
> changed at some later point. Presumably, that change was driven by
> evidence that the "optimization" wasn't worth while.

I guess first of all probably a reengineering was done, and
StringBuffer was split into AbstractStringBuilder and StringBuffer.
And then StringBuilder was created. The class diagramm is basically:

          AbstractStringBuilder
          /                    \
      StringBuffer             StringBuilder

Most of the StringBuffer methods are synchronized and then delegate
to the abstract super class. In StringBuilder the methods are
non-synchronized and then also delegate to the abstract super class.

The delegation instead of just using the methods from the abstract
class is needed so that the correct type is returned. For example
the AbstractStringBuilder does have an append that even returns
an AbstractStringBuilder. But it is then overridden by a method that 
returns StringBuffer respectively StringBuilder.

So we see for example:

     In StringBuffer:

     public synchronized StringBuffer append(char c) {
         super.append(c);
         return this;
     }

     In StringBuilder:

     public StringBuilder append(char c) {
         super.append(c);
         return this;
     }

The necessary overriding capability called covariant return types is
only available since Java 1.5.

http://www.java-tips.org/java-se-tips/java.lang/covariant-return-types.html

So maybe during all this quality language reengineering the aspect
of optimization became less prominent.

Best Regards

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: StringBuilder Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-09-17 19:56 +0300
  Re: StringBuilder Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-17 20:35 +0200
  Re: StringBuilder Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-09-17 15:34 -0700
    Re: StringBuilder Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-18 01:33 +0200
      Re: StringBuilder Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-18 01:56 +0200
      Re: StringBuilder Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-09-17 20:58 -0700
    Re: StringBuilder Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-09-17 22:44 -0700
      Re: StringBuilder Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-18 09:54 +0200
        Re: StringBuilder Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-18 09:59 +0200
        Re: StringBuilder Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-09-18 07:28 -0700
      Re: StringBuilder Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-18 08:15 -0400
        Re: StringBuilder Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-18 15:32 +0200
          Re: StringBuilder Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-18 09:50 -0400
            Re: StringBuilder Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-09-18 17:08 +0300
            Re: StringBuilder Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-18 22:13 +0200
              Re: StringBuilder Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-18 22:29 +0200
                Re: StringBuilder Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2011-09-18 22:39 +0200
      Re: StringBuilder Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-09-19 09:45 -0700

csiph-web