On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 18:47:11 GMT, Chen Liang <li...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> lingjun-cg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
>> commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   8333396: Performance regression of DecimalFormat.format
>
> For StringBuf proxy, is it acceptible for us to introduce a new jdk.internal 
> public interface (accessible only within java.base module) to expose common 
> public methods in AbstractStringBuilder? We have public types extending or 
> implementing non-public-types in the JDK (AbstractStringBuilder, 
> NamedPackage) so I guess having a new module-specific superinterface would be 
> fine? Need verification from API experts.

> Hi @liach Do you know any other places within java.base where we would need 
> the same proxy for StringBuffer?

Good question! I looked at 
https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/22/docs/api/java.base/java/lang/class-use/StringBuffer.html.
 I think such a new interface indeed is of limited usefulness, as we don't 
really have that many non-java.lang APIs closely tied to StringBuffer. Matcher 
is like one, but it lives mostly fine without the shadowing because it is using 
`Appendable`. And this has enlightened me.

In fact, we can use `Appendable` too, as we just need 2 `append` from 
`Appendable` and `subSequence` (replacing `substring`) and `length` from 
`CharSequence`. We can declare method like:

<T extends Appendable & CharSequence> T format(double number, T toAppendTo,
                         FieldPosition status) {

This signature accepts both `StringBuilder` and `StringBuffer`; all use sites 
can be according updated. The only thing need to change is that `substring` 
should now become `subSequence`, but it's just used in 
`CharacterIteratorFieldDelegate` so the impact is small.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19513#issuecomment-2174336411

Reply via email to