Why doesn't CharBuffer.put(String) take a CharSequence?

[Gili]

Hi,

I'm curious, why does http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/nio/CharBuffer.html#put(java.lang.String) take a String instead of a CharSequence?

Thank you,
Gili

[Dane Foster]

Because String IS A CharSequence.

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Gili<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I'm curious, why does
> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/nio/CharBuffer.html#put(java.lang.String)
> take a String instead of a CharSequence?
>
> Thank you,
> Gili
> --
> View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Why-doesn%27t-CharBuffer.put%28String%29-take-a-CharSequence--tp3155780p3155780.html
> Sent from the nio-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

[Alan Bateman]

Gili wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm curious, why does
> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/nio/CharBuffer.html#put(java.lang.String)
> take a String instead of a CharSequence?
>
> Thank you,
> Gili
>  
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4860681

[Gili]

Any chance you can roll this in as part of JDK7? :)

Right now my code has to use fragile "instanceof" code. It will break if new implementations are added in the future. I took a look at the underlying methods for put(CharBuffer) and put(String) and they seem to be doing the exact same thing, just using get() instead of chatAt().

Gili

Alan Bateman wrote:

Gili wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm curious, why does
> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/nio/CharBuffer.html#put(java.lang.String)
> take a String instead of a CharSequence?
>
> Thank you,
> Gili
>  
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4860681

[i30817]

Wouldn't it be nice if CharSequence had the getChars method of String?
I fear charAt makes algorithms that need buffered copies much slower.
I already asked why not, but adding methods is a incompatible change for interfaces. In this special case, if CharSequence was a abstract class, it could be easily be implemented by charAt, and overridden for performance in implementations, much like InputStream is now. In fact much the same thing could be said for sort in collections.
Missing abstract methods tend to be able to be implemented by primitive methods.
The reason i don't like to use interfaces (except enums that can't extend anything, and are very useful to discoverability).