Scott Sanders wrote:
>>From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>I would like some more information and clarification on the
>>Jakarta Commons charter and practicalities of placing code
>>there. Avalon Excalibur's code is fairly integrated, and is
>>a testimony to how well the API works. However, because it
>>is easier to use the concurrent package synchronization
>>primitives rather than using the "synchronized" keyword all
>>the time, I have used them to implement thread-safe pools,
>>among other things.
>>
>>As far as I can tell there are separate packages for pooling,
>>synchronization primitives, and other utilities. My
>>understanding regarding the charter is that you don't want
>>cross library dependancies in Commons. Were I to advocate
>>moving the utilities in Avalon Excalibur to Jakarta Commons,
>>how would that work itself out?
>>
>>For instance, the new Pool implementations that I am writing
>>are based on the new Buffer classes and use the
>>synchronization primitives.
>>
>
> Does this mean that the buffer and sync primitives would also be
> submitted to commons?
Sure, the Buffer would go in Collections for example.
I mean there is alot of utility code in Excalibur, from file
utilities to queue implementations.
--
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
