[offtopic] RE: [jdom-interest] Text class

[Matthew Mackenzie]

I think it might have just been a default decision for java.lang.*, it
makes sense to have a degree of finality among types that are considered
psuedo-primitive.  Too bad there wasn't a
java.lang.AbstractStringBuffer...
 
Cheers,
 
Matt

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Tom Bradford 
	Sent: Sat 5/26/2001 6:49 PM 
	To: Matthew Mackenzie 
	Cc: jdom-interest at jdom.org 
	Subject: Re: [offtopic] RE: [jdom-interest] Text class
	
	

	Matthew Mackenzie wrote:
	> Forgive me if this is terribly naive, but does any one know
why
	> java.lang.String* are final?
	
	In the case of String, it's because in order to safely say that
the
	value is immutable, you can't have access to the underlying
character
	array.  It would be bad.  With StringBuffer, I have no idea.
	
	--
	Tom Bradford --- The dbXML Project --- http://www.dbxml.org/
	We store your XML data a hell of a lot better than /dev/null
	

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 4430 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://jdom.org/pipermail/jdom-interest/attachments/20010526/b778cab7/attachment.bin