If the very first operation that is done with an ArrayList is to pass addAll a collection which has more than ten elements, then any effort put into creating an initial ten-element array to hold the ArrayList's contents would be thrown out the window. Whenever something is added to an ArrayList it's necessary to test whether the size of the resulting list will exceed the size of the backing store; allowing the initial backing store to have size zero rather than ten will cause this test to fail one extra time in the lifetime of a list whose first operation is an "add" which would require creating the initial ten-item array, but that cost is less than the cost of creating a ten-item array that never ends up getting used.

That having been said, it might have been possible to improve performance further in some contexts if there were a overload of "addAll" which specified how many items (if any) would likely be added to the list after the present one, and which could use that to influence its allocation behavior. In some cases code which adds the last few items to a list will have a pretty good idea that the list is never going to need any space beyond that. There are many situations where a list will get populated once and never modified after that. If at the point code knows that the ultimate size of a list will be 170 elements, it has 150 elements and a backing store of size 160, growing the backing store to size 320 will be unhelpful and leaving it at size 320 or trimming it to 170 will be less efficient than simply having the next allocation grow it to 170.