I was hoping that Rodney would reply. Anyway, these sound like sensible enhancements to [primitives]. I am willing to review the classes you add.
Stephen From: "Alex Karasulu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I've written the Boolean equivalents for the collections we have in commons > primitives. Rather then just check them in I thought it might be proper to > ask first. > > I needed a ArrayBooleanList as well as the other primitives to finish off > the set so I just created one. > > Also I have built stacks for all the primitive types. Is it worth while > checking those in as well? Right now they're kind of out of place sitting > within a BER decoder package I have here: > > http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/incubator/directory/snickers/trunk/ber/src > /java/org/apache/snickers/ber/digester/?root=Apache-SVN > > There are the usual suspects: > > BooleanStack > ByteStack > CharStack > ShortStack > IntStack > LongStack > FloatStack > DoubleStack > > I also thing these can be embellished somewhat. We might want to extract > interfaces from them and follow the same model of abstracting away the > backing store as has been done with the List collections; namely extracting > the interface, having an abstract implementation, having concrete > implementations with a real backing store, and even having some > java.util.Stack decorators etc. > > Alex > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
