On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 7:03 AM, Benedikt Ritter <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Adrian > > 2015-01-24 19:43 GMT+01:00 Adrian Crum <[email protected]>: > >> Slightly off-topic but somewhat related... >> >> I saw a recent commit where a "performance improvement" went something >> like this: >> >> StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(); >> sb.append("foo"); >> >> was replaced with >> >> StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder("foo"); >> >> The change reduced the code by one line, but there was no "performance >> improvement" - because the StringBuilder constructor calls append(). >> > > All methods on StringBuffer are synchronized, so there a slight overhead of > acquiring the lock. This is usually the argument for using StringBuilder > over StringBuffer. >
But, there was no StringBuffer referenced in the above code snippet, right, so the sync vs. non-sync doesn't apply. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
