From 5b8249de5c58aa8767c5ff6c94b0893e56f35e05 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Pedro=20Vin=C3=ADcius?= <50002503+Pedro-V@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2024 18:24:44 -0300 Subject: [PATCH] Correct wrong claim about StringBuilder performance. --- exercises/practice/reverse-string/.approaches/introduction.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/exercises/practice/reverse-string/.approaches/introduction.md b/exercises/practice/reverse-string/.approaches/introduction.md index e704f8fab6..db0cab5fb7 100644 --- a/exercises/practice/reverse-string/.approaches/introduction.md +++ b/exercises/practice/reverse-string/.approaches/introduction.md @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ If readability is your primary concern (and it usually should be), the LINQ-base The `Array.Reverse()` approach is the best performing apporach. For a more detailed breakdown, check the [performance article][article-performance]. -The `StringBuilder` approach has the worst performance of the listed approach, and is more error-prone to write as it has to deal with lower and upper bounds checking. +The `StringBuilder` approach has the second worst performance (after the LINQ-based) of the listed approach, and is more error-prone to write as it has to deal with lower and upper bounds checking. [constructor-array-chars]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.string.-ctor [article-performance]: https://exercism.org/tracks/csharp/exercises/reverse-string/articles/performance