--- Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Religion. > > While in my own code I used to be quite open in terms of allowing lots of > things, Lang is helping to make me think more defensively when code will > be used by other people. For example I no longer make methods public if I > don't think they should be private/protected, I actually use the > anonymous/package scope. > > Anyways. Offering the CharSet seemed to be too much like showing the > implementation to the user and a particular religion to be obeyed, so I > was quite happy for it to be hidden.
Sorry if I am being dense here, but isn't CharSet already exposed? Its constructor is protected, but the public factory method CharSetUtils.evaluate can be used to create instances. Am I missing something? I must be really missing the point, since to me it seems that having the CharSetUtils methods take strings or string[]s in the internal "set notation" is actually showing/depending on more internal implementation detail than just having them take the encapsulated objects (CharSets). I think that I am missing something basic. Sorry if these are stupid questions. Phil > > It's better to hide it before release then offer it later than try to > hide > it later :) > > Hen > > On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Phil Steitz wrote: > > > I agree with this move. > > > > One thing that we might want to think about (post 2.0), however, is > > actually adding back a better version to CharSetUtils with set support. > > > > I have never understood, btw, why the CharSetUtils methods do not also > > accept CharSets as arguments. Why is this? > > > > Phil > > > > --- Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I have committed this change to CVS as follows: > > > > > > - original translate function in CharSetUtils is unchanged, but > > > DEPRECATED > > > > > > - NEW method 'replaceChars' added to StringUtils. (translate didn't > use > > > set > > > notation, so was completely out of place on CharSetUtils. > replaceChars > > > follows our style of using Java-like method names) > > > > > > - replaceChars performs as per below: > > > replaceChars(*str, null, *) = *str > > > replaceChars(*str, "", *) = *str > > > replaceChars(*, "abc", null) = delete chars 'abc' from string > > > replaceChars(*, "abc", "") = delete chars 'abc' from string > > > replaceChars(*, "abc", "z") = replace chars 'a' with 'z', DELETE > 'b','c' > > > replaceChars(*, "abc", "zyxwv") = replace chars 'a' with 'z', 'b' > with > > > 'y', > > > 'c' with 'x', IGNORE 'w','v' > > > Note the change to delete if replaceChars is shorter, as Eric > suggested. > > > It > > > makes much more sense that way. > > > > > > Stephen > > > > > > From: "Eric Galluzzo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Stephen Colebourne wrote: > > > > > I propose the clearest is: > > > > > > > > > >translate(*str, null, *) = *str > > > > >translate(*str, "", *) = *str > > > > >translate(*, "abc", null) = delete chars 'abc' from string > > > > >translate(*, "abc", "") = delete chars 'abc' from string > > > > >translate(*, "abc", "z") = replace chars 'abc' with 'z' > > > > >translate(*, "abc", "zyxwv") = replace chars 'a' with 'z', 'b' > with > > > 'y', > > > > >'c' with 'x', ignore 'wv' > > > > > > > > > >--> no errors > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would it make sense for the translate() function to mimic the XPath > > > > translate() function's behavior? (See > > > > http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath#function-translate.) That seems to be > what > > > > StringUtils.translate() is modeled upon -- either that or the old > Unix > > > > 'tr' utility. Following XPath's translate() function definition, > all > > > > your examples above would remain intact except that: > > > > > > > > translate(*, "abc", "z") > > > > > > > > would cause 'a' to be replaced with 'z', and would delete all > > > > occurrences of 'b' and 'c'. > > > > > > > > If I have no idea what I'm talking about, feel free to brush these > > > > comments aside with a Dogbert-style "Bah." :) > > > > > > > > - Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > 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] > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software > > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
