On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 07:39:10 GMT, Alan Bateman <[email protected]> wrote:
> There was effort a few years ago to push out the first use of > StandardCharsets as its initializer loaded all the standard charsets. So this > is why you will have seen usages replaced with (mostly) UTF_8.INSTANCE. This > was all before Project Leyden and the recent work on AOT. It would be useful > to do some measurements to see if this change shows any benefit. We could certainly do measurements. However; the use of `StandardCharsets` was introduced last August via #26822. Before that change `ZipCoder` used strictly `UTF_8.INSTANCE`. That PR did not mention `StandardCharsets` or any motivation for introducing it. To me, this looked like a simple oversight. I don't have strong opinions of whether we should use `UTF_8.INSTANCE` or `StandardCharsets`, but would prefer if we can be consistent in this class/area and that any choice is deliberate and not just something slipped in sideways. In other words, I think the burden of proof should be on #26822 for introducing `StandardCharsets.UTF_8.INSTANCE` in a class that otherwise uses `UTF_8.INSTANCE`, not for this PR reestablishing consistency and long time practise. But again, opinions loosely help, I can surely withdraw this PR if that's consenus, even if I don't quite understand why :-) ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/29443#issuecomment-3952119241
