Hi Roel, Would you like to submit a patch and contribute?
Paul. On Jun 4, 2013, at 4:16 PM, Roel Spilker <r.spil...@gmail.com> wrote: > Looking at the implementation, the code in toString suggest that it's > worthwhile to optimize for an empty suffix (although I doubt that this > optimization has any measurable effects). But the constructor always > concatenates the prefix and the suffix, which results in both a new string > instance and a StringBuilder. If an empty suffix is common (actually, having > a separate constructor and the current toString implementation both suggest > it is), I think that the initializing the emptyValue field in the constructor > should be written as: > > this.emptyValue = this.suffix.isEmpty() ? this.prefix : this.prefix + > this.suffix; > > Actually, since there is also a setEmptyValue, I think that the field should > be left null, and toString and length check for null, resulting in even less > objects allocated in that scenario. > > Roel > > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 5:43 PM, <paul.san...@oracle.com> wrote: > Changeset: a79e2683eae3 > Author: psandoz > Date: 2013-06-03 17:37 +0200 > URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/a79e2683eae3 > > 8014383: StringJoiner example in class description not in sync with streams > API > Reviewed-by: alanb > > ! src/share/classes/java/util/StringJoiner.java > >
