Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.CARNet.hr!garrison.bnet.hr!gregory.BNet.hr!not-for-mail
From: Josip Almasi <joe@vrspace.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Java blunders
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 00:11:26 +0200
Organization: B.net Hrvatska d.o.o.
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <lr6hqe$4bs$1@gregory.bnet.hr>
References: <jvbts91r2f9onj1e3dbr5lvqp70hmofkum@4ax.com> <53cef75d$0$291$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <7s6vs9p395bretqrtdvh9i6til83vfk52p@4ax.com> <53d04b5f$0$291$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <sip0t9dqg0c77e7u4o7vo2brs8chsdqok7@4ax.com> <lr6bfm$1vr$1@gregory.bnet.hr> <lr6cdv$se9$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cpe-188-252-131-105.zg5.cable.xnet.hr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: gregory.bnet.hr 1406585486 4476 188.252.131.105 (28 Jul 2014 22:11:26 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@globalnet.hr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 22:11:26 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
In-Reply-To: <lr6cdv$se9$1@dont-email.me>
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:29415

On 07/28/2014 10:39 PM, Eric Sosman wrote:
> On 7/28/2014 4:23 PM, Josip Almasi wrote:
>> I think you guys missed worst thing with java concatenation, and it's
>> got nothing to do with operator.
>> It's about how operator gets interpreted:
>>
>> out.println ( new StringBuffer("the answer is ").append(new
>> StringBuffer(a + b)).append(new StringBuffer("."));
>
>      Why do you think this is so?

OK you had me look at the spec:)
String concatenation is implemented through the StringBuilder(or 
StringBuffer) class and its append method.

> javac 1.8.0_11 compiles it to
> the equivalent of
>
>      out.println(new StringBuilder()
>          .append("the answer is ")
>          .append(a + b)
>          .append(".")
>          .toString());
>
> ... and I think all javac's have done so for a long time (but I
> don't have them available for checking).
>
>> It's three new objects, all synchronized.
>
>      ... for suitable values of "three" (i.e., 2) and "all" (0).
>
>> OK I haven't read the spec for a while but that's it IIRC, spec requires
>> it that way.
>
>      StringBuilder replaced StringBuffer for this purpose in Java 1.5,
> just under ten years ago.  I guess that counts as "a while."  ;-)


Indeed:)

I stand corrected.

Regards...