Stephen,
I'm all for adding support for unmodifiableIterable, unmodifableNavigableMap, and unmodifableNavigableSet. However, I think adding public access to such a iterator decorator goes against the guidelines of the collections design faq (4 and 5): http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/technotes/guides/collections/designfaq.html#8 So following the guideline of never passing an Iterator around, that leaves you with the following: 1. Your custom container is backed by collection, use Collections.unmodifiableXXX(this.internal).iterator() 2. Your custom container is backed by an array, use Arrays.asList, followed by point 1. 3. Your custom container has specialized layout, you have to write an iterator with a remove implementation that removes or throws and the unmodifable one is easy to write. Assuming that JDK had unmodifiableIterable decorator, is there is there a corner case that I'm not seeing or is the main reservation the extra method calls and creation of some well behaved garbage? Jason > Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:01:57 -0400 > Subject: Re: java.util.Pair > From: scolebou...@joda.org > To: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net > > (I´m writing from a slow connection in a national park in Chile) > > I meant a decortator for an iterator that wraps the original making it > immutable. > > Stephen _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/210850552/direct/01/
