Maybe because Appendable comes with IOExceptions?
On 21/06/2019 17:06, Robert Marcano wrote:
Greetings. Is there a reason the newest APIs added to Matcher
(performance maybe?) with StringBuilder arguments weren't added as
Appendable instead?
For example:
public StringBuilder appendTail(StringBuilder sb)
public Matcher appendReplacement(StringBuilder sb, String replacement)
Could have been:
public <T extends Appendable> T appendTail(T ap)
public Matcher appendReplacement(Appendable ap, String replacement)
Both appendReplacement(...) implementations are copies, that could be
reduced to a simple one if Appendable was the argument, and the present
ones calling to that.
If this sounds reasonable, I could write a patch for testing.
Note: I was hit with this when trying to use another kind of Appendable
optimized for my use case.
