On Sun, 6 Oct 2024 14:20:12 GMT, Chen Liang <li...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> This Pull Requests proposes an implementation for >> [JDK-8341566](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8341566): Adding the new >> method `public static Reader Reader.of(CharSequence)` will return an >> anonymous, non-synchronized implementation of a `Reader` for each kind of >> `CharSequence` implementation. It is optimized for `String`, >> `StringBuilder`, `StringBuffer` and `CharBuffer`. >> >> In addition, this Pull Request proposes to replace the implementation of >> `StringReader` to become a simple synchronized wrapper around >> `Reader.of(CharSequence)` for the case of `String` sources. To ensure >> correctness, this PR... >> * ...simply moved the **original code** of `StringBuilder` to become the >> de-facto implementation of `Reader.of()`, then stripped synchronized from it >> on the left hand, but kept just a synchronized wrapper on the right hand. >> Then added a `switch` for optimizations within the original code, at the >> exact location where previously just an optimization for `String` lived in. >> * ...added tests for all methods (`Of.java`), and applied that test upon the >> modified `StringBuilder`. >> >> Wherever new JavaDocs were added, existing phrases from other code locations >> have been copied and adapted, to best match the same wording. > > src/java.base/share/classes/java/io/Reader.java line 152: > >> 150: * reader was being used by a single thread (as is generally the >> case). >> 151: * Where possible, it is recommended that this class be used in >> preference >> 152: * to {@code StringReader} as it will be faster under most >> implementations. > > I believe this paragraph is redundant, now that `StringReader` is a > somewhat-deprecated API that we aim to migrate away from. We can note these > differences in the API notes of `StringReader`. As Alan already proposed, I am just removing it in this very minute. > src/java.base/share/classes/java/io/Reader.java line 174: > >> 172: * @since 24 >> 173: */ >> 174: public static Reader of(CharSequence c) { > > Should we give this factory a more specific name so we don't clash in the > future? For example, if we add another factory `of(A a)` for interface `A`, > then it would be confusing to have an instance of `interface C extends > CharSequence, A` to be passed to `of`. I do not see what is "confusing" in that case, as the caller still gets what he intends: a reader for the passed source. I also wonder how likely that case actually is. Anyways, I may be biased as I proposed `of`. @AlanBateman WDYT? ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21371#discussion_r1789120245 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21371#discussion_r1789119975
