David
From: Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [collections] Collections Next Gen
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:08:21 -0500 (EST)
That's fine.
So ProxyMap is special, all ProxyMap implementations should be package-private and available through a MapUtils class and can have constructors which take a collection as copy-by-reference as it's not a public API?
So, SequencedHashMap would be deprecated and removed, and MapUtils.sequencedMap(Map) added?
Hen
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, David Graham wrote:
> The Java collections all use your number 1 approach. I believe it would be
> very confusing for users if commons-collections behaved differently. An
> example of the Java collections wrapping technique is
> Collections.synchronizedMap(Map). Using this technique would be familiar
> and easy to understand for users.
>
> David
>
>
>
> >From: Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List"
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: [collections] Collections Next Gen
> >Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:54:47 -0500 (EST)
> >
> >
> >I'm aiming to restructure the Collections API a bit. Basically an
> >annoyance at things like:
> >
> >SequencedHashMap, when the Hash part of it shouldn't be there. Ditto for
> >MultiHashMap etc etc.
> >
> >I've one question I'd like to air-out first though:
> >
> >ProxyMap has a constructor which takes a Map. It uses this map as the map
> >it will proxy to. This is against the Collections spec, which says that a
> >java.util.Map implementation [and other Collections] should treat a
> >constructor argument of a Map as values to copy across. ie) copy-by-value
> >rather than copy-by-reference I guess.
> >
> >I'd like to standardise this as either something we obey, or don't obey.
> >Personally I've never liked it and not obeyed it, as a putAll or addAll
> >method easily handles this functionality. Usually the Collections project
> >has obeyed it however, as it is an unwritten part of the specification we
> >are obeying. It seems we have three options I think:
> >
> >
> >1) We strictly obey the specification. A collection-type parameter to a
> >constructor is a copy-by-value.
> >
> >2) We strictly obey our own specification, saying that collection-type
> >parameters mean wrapping.
> >
> >3) Any extension of ProxyMap uses copy-by-reference as its specification.
> >So when I pass a HashMap() into a SequencedMap, it uses that HashMap as
> >its underlying structure.
> > Any other extension of a Map uses copy-by-value, so if I pass a HashMap
> >into a new FastHashMap, it copies the values from the HashMap into the
> >FastHashMap.
> >
> >
> >I prefer number 3. My aim is to make the majority of the Collections
> >classes extensions of ProxyXxx classes. Anyone -1?
> >
> >Hen
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
