Improve performance by replacing StringBuffer with StringBuilder #809
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Build failed on Java 8, I'll take a look and fix it up, sorry about that. |
|
Many thanks, tt sounds like a good idea. |
|
Makes perfect sense to me. It looks like Java didn't add some methods for StringBuilder until 11. I think I still have 8 installed somewhere, I'll figure it out. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Only StringBuffers are being replaced with StringBuilder in this pull request.
No new features in this PR.
StringBuilder is faster than StringBuffer as synchronization does not occur.
This is safe to do for locally used StringBuffers where there is no need for synchronization, all places changed this PR are locally used.
All tests pass.