On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 19:33:02 GMT, Naoto Sato <na...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I did not mean to introduce a public API for this change (if we do, the fix >> cannot be backported). I thought we could define a package private one, but >> based on your observation, it may get messier... So I agree that falling >> back to `StringBuf` is the way to go, IMO. > >> So, considering all the information given, is it enough to start our new >> review process? @naotoj @liach @justin-curtis-lu > > Well, I was suggesting the same buffer proxying for other Format classes than > NumberFormat subclasses, such as DateFormat so that they would have the same > performance benefit. Would you be willing to do that too? Thanks all for your valuable suggestions. All suggestions were accepted. Is it enough to start our new review process? @naotoj @justin-curtis-lu @liach @irisclark ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19513#issuecomment-2207831524
