Hi all, I have a couple of observations on the new Comparators in Collections.
First, I'm not sure all of these Comparators are generic enough to include in Collections. ComparableComparator and ReverseComparator seem to be right on. NumericStringComparator, PackageNameComparator, and UrlComparator seem too specific for Collections though. It seems that if a Collection or Comparator would seem out of place in the JDK, it's not a good candidate for Collections. PackageNameComparator and UrlComparator in particular seem out of place. Most comparators are highly specific, and comparators are also very easy to write. Consequently, we should be wary of which Comparators we include. Bay, would you object to removing NumericStringComparator, PackageNameComparator and UrlComparator? Second, none of the Comparators are Serializable. Shouldn't they be, so that their corresponding Collections will be serializable? - Morgan _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
