News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why Zig over C for Systems Programming. Parent comment

Re:Why Zig over C for Systems Programming by wpollock on Friday November 13, 2026 @01:25PM (#50487640)
> But it uses flyweight instances for values up to 256, so in Java, whether two Integers with the same numeric value are equal according to the = operator depends on what that value is. ...

I believe Java caches Integer objects for values -128..+128, not 256. But that may be an implementation detail, and not something to count on.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Zig over C for Systems Programming by gf000 on Friday November 13, 2026 @01:34PM (#50487779)
And since java 28's value types, == will work identically for all Integers, finally.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Zig over C for Systems Programming by wpollock on Friday November 13, 2026 @03:08PM (#50488943)
[delayed]
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Zig over C for Systems Programming by bunderbunder on Friday November 13, 2026 @01:43PM (#50487894)
No, you’re right. I misremembered.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Zig over C for Systems Programming by wpollock on Friday November 13, 2026 @02:59PM (#50488846)
> No, you’re right. I misremembered.

We both misremembered. I found where this is documented and the range is -128..127 inclusive: <https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/27/docs/api/java.base...>

[ Parent | on HN ]