Win a copy of Think Java: How to Think Like a Computer Scientist this week in the Java in General forum!
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Difference between String.copyValueOf(char[]) and String.valueOf(char[])

 
Rohan Kayan
Ranch Hand
Posts: 123
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
What is the difference between String.copyValueOf(char[]) and String.valueOf(char[])??
 
Chetan Parekh
Ranch Hand
Posts: 3640
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Just see what's there in API....

public static String valueOf(char[] data)
Returns the string representation of the char array argument. The contents of the character array are copied; subsequent modification of the character array does not affect the newly created string.
Parameters:
data - a char array.
Returns:
a newly allocated string representing the same sequence of characters contained in the character array argument


public static String copyValueOf(char[] data)
Returns a String that is equivalent to the specified character array. It creates a new array and copies the characters into it.
Parameters:
data - the character array.
Returns:
a String that contains the characters of the character array.
 
Ilja Preuss
author
Sheriff
Posts: 14112
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Originally posted by Chetan Parekh:
Just see what's there in API....


Uhh, from the quoted JavaDoc, I actually don't see any implied difference in behaviour. Am I missing something?
 
Marilyn de Queiroz
Sheriff
Posts: 9063
12
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Looking at the source code I see:
 
Hentay Duke
Ranch Hand
Posts: 198
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Looking at the API and source code there doesn't seem to be any difference in functionality. Is someone saying there is a noticable difference? How about adding a comment to the copied API or source code you post here, it's hard to tell what your trying to say or point out.
 
Ernest Friedman-Hill
author and iconoclast
Marshal
Pie
Posts: 24211
35
Chrome Eclipse IDE Mac OS X
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Marilyn got me thinking. I rooted around for the oldest JDK source code I have -- JDK 1.0 beta for sparc -- and in String.java, you find this (emphasis mine




But the comments lie, actually. The array ends up being copied in both cases, although copyValueOf() does it explicitly and then calls "new String()", and valueOf calls "new String()" directly. The String constructor also copies the array, so this old version of copyValueOf results in the char[] being copied twice, for no reason.

The very strong implication is that, sometime in the history of Java Strings, before the 1.0 release, Strings weren't immutable, and they had constructors and a factory method which let you create instances that used a specific char[] to hold their contents! By the 1.0 release, that capability had been removed, but these two methods both remained -- even though copyValueOf() was redundant and could easily have been removed.

Chalk it up to... a mistake.
[ June 07, 2005: Message edited by: Ernest Friedman-Hill ]
 
Ilja Preuss
author
Sheriff
Posts: 14112
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Interesting! So one of those methods probably should be deprecated...
 
Rohan Kayan
Ranch Hand
Posts: 123
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
But none of the methods is deprecated from java 1.3 . I tried with on example to check the functionality


public class StringCopyValueOf
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
char name[]= {'r','o','h','a','n'};
String s1 = String.valueOf(name);
String s2 =String.copyValueOf(name);
System.out.println(s1);
System.out.println(s2);
name[3]='k';
System.out.println(s1);
System.out.println(s2);
System.out.println(name);

}
}

Output is
rohan
rohan
rohan
rohan
rohkn

so it seems that there is not difference in the funcationality.
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic