Well, you answered my questions...they were mostly targeted to the Buffer classes, which look like they could be retrofitted to implement Collection interfaces. But, since, as you said, they run much better without implementing the List interface, it probably makes the most sense as it is.
Thanks, Chris -----Original Message----- From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 11:19 AM To: Avalon Developers List Subject: Re: Why do Excalibur collection classes not use JDK Collections framework? Christopher Randall wrote: > Is there a particular reason the Excalibur collection classes do not implement the >standard java.util collection interfaces, or is it just a undersight? > > It would seem that you would gain some real flexibility by having these classes fit >the Collection API. > > Chris > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Can you give an example of what you mean? The Buffer classes can be optimized because they *don't* use the List or Collection interface. They have the FIFO buffer working nicely. THat has a defined reason. The BucketMap does implement the Map interface. Which ones are you wanting to know about? -- "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]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
