2011/5/20 Reto Bachmann-Gmür <[email protected]>

> ----- Original message -----
> > I think it would be interesting to add a method for getting the graph
> > name, btw, null if there is none
> yet another issue. And this issue i think would depend on triple
> collections instances knowing about their names. But this would imply
> different identity criterions. It might be a dangerous weaking of the
> boundaries between reference and referenced entity.
>

I agree with Reto, that sounds out of the scope and responsibilities of
GraphNode.


>
> Reto
>
>
> >
> > Henry
> >
> > On 20 May 2011, at 12:11, Reto Bachmann-Gmür wrote:
> >
> > > I think it is very straight forward to add a generic type to
> > > graphnode. It needs changing lots of code to prevent warning, in most
> > > cases i think we have to add a <?> or <Resource>, the situation where
> > > we actually have a method declared to return an objetc with a concrete
> > > type param are relatively seldom.
> > >
> > > What motivates the change? Graphnode is a convenience object, where
> > > not all methods are usable for every instance. Rather than having
> > > generics we could also just have 3 or 4 subtypes, in this cas we could
> > > not just have more concrete return types for getNode but also have
> > > methods that only apply to a specifc type.
> > >
> > > But again, seeing where you think the change would bring concrete
> > > benefits would make it easier to discuss the proposal.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > reto
> > >
> > > ----- Original message -----
> > > >
> > > > On 20 May 2011, at 00:13, Tommaso Teofili wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > as discussed in CLEREZZA-537 it may be worth having GraphNodes use
> > > > > generics to add something like "T extends Resource" parameter
> > > > > allowing   easiest subject type retrieving (avoiding useless casts,
> > > > > as said by   Henry); I plan to create a patch tomorrow so that
> > > > > anyone can review it   and we can discuss it (in a new issue).
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Tommaso
> > > >
> > > > +1 for me. Be interested to see how it works out.
> > > >
> > > > Henry
> > > >
> > > > Social Web Architect
> > > > http://bblfish.net/
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Social Web Architect
> > http://bblfish.net/
> >
>
>

Reply via email to