This week's giveaway is in the Spring forum.
We're giving away four copies of REST with Spring (video course) and have Eugen Paraschiv on-line!
See this thread for details.
The moose likes Java in General and the fly likes String  Pool Vs  String new operator Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login

Win a copy of REST with Spring (video course) this week in the Spring forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Java » Java in General
Bookmark "String  Pool Vs  String new operator" Watch "String  Pool Vs  String new operator" New topic

String Pool Vs String new operator

kri shan
Ranch Hand

Joined: Apr 08, 2004
Posts: 1404
String str1 = "how are you";

String str2 = new String("how are you");

Whether String Str1 will refer string poll for Str1 exists in the pool or not. If exists, then this will return the reference, If not exist, will it create new object like new operator ?
String str2 never refer the string pool because it is created by new operator(creates new String object in the heap). Which one is memory efficient ?
Paul Clapham

Joined: Oct 14, 2005
Posts: 19857

Is it more memory-efficient to use an existing object from a pool, or to create a new object which is a copy of one from the pool?
Campbell Ritchie

Joined: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 45292
Have you seen what it says in the API about that String constructor?
Rob Spoor

Joined: Oct 27, 2005
Posts: 20184

Obviously the first statement is more memory efficient. Both use the same String from the String pool, but the first one uses only this object; the second one makes an exact copy of it and uses that. With String being immutable, that's completely superfluous. That's why the API discourages using that constructor, as Campbell's link indicates.

How To Ask Questions How To Answer Questions
I agree. Here's the link:
subject: String Pool Vs String new operator
It's not a secret anymore!