On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, John Yu wrote:
> > > > 4) Pair. Is this Collections? Dunno. Anyway, pairs seem to be nice > > > > sometimes. I only have one because I was porting the lisp examples > > to Java > > > > from the lisp book [yep, i'm that sick]. > > > > > > Isn't o.a.c.collections.DefaultMapEntry, fulfilling the role of Pair? > > > >Possibly, though it isn't semantically. Assuming there's a need for a Pair > >class, using DefaultMapEntry would not fulfill it, even if the > >functionality were the same. > > > >My vague view being that things can be syntactically the same but > >semantically different. > > > You lost me. > Could you elaborate? What semantics you're referring to in Pair? Erm.. pass? :) I was hoping there might be a good Lisp fanatic or something with some reasons for why a Pair object would be very useful. I seem to recall reading someone's blog opining for a Pair class. The semantic bit was... I think there are many places where someone would like to use a Pair and not a DefaultMapEntry. ie) They're not dealing with Map.Entry functionality. [One of the dangerous parts of suggesting ideas you don't believe in a lot yourself :) ] Similar for the Mutable-primitives. I often find a point in code where I think, "wish I could set the Integer", but then I get around it somehow without much effort. Hen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
