Remove Misleading Claim About Java's Value Types in Object Stack Allocation Documentation

[mburakeker]

Problem Description
The documentation for Object Stack Allocation currently includes the following statement:

This optimization is more important for Java since it doesn't have value types.

This is misleading because:

• Java does have an equivalent to value types, called Primitive Types, which are stored in stack memory.
• The comparison suggesting Object Stack Allocation is more important for Java is inaccurate.

Proposed Solution
Replace the misleading sentence with:

This is also important for Java.

This update removes the false comparison and keeps the focus on the scope of Object Stack Allocation across both .NET and Java.

[mburakeker]

Attached is my pull request with Proposed Solution. #110296

[teo-tsirpanis]

Primitive types in Java are only boolean, char, byte, int, short, long, float, and double. Unlike C# you cannot declare a custom value type in Java. Because all user-defined types in Java are classes and therefore allocated on the heap, Object Stack Allocation is more important in Java because developers have no manual control of which values stay in the stack.

[mburakeker]

Primitive types in Java are only boolean, char, byte, int, short, long, float, and double. Unlike C# you cannot declare a custom value type in Java. Because all user-defined types in Java are classes and therefore allocated on the heap, Object Stack Allocation is more important in Java because developers have no manual control of which values stay in the stack.

Thank you for the explanation! Your comment provides a much clearer explanation. I'll close my PR since it’s obsolete.
Feel free to update the documentation with better wording if you'd like.