I took a look at the implementation. The matcher code just iterates the
given priority list. isEmpty() is used, but it shouldn't be a problem.
As far as an Iterable gives an Iterator which consistently iterates
elements based on the priority or weight, the Iterable works.
Use of Iterable does give more flexibility, but I'm not sure how much it
would add value to the API use. You can implement your own Iterable, but
would many developers implement an Iterable to give a language priority
list?
Masayoshi
On 2013/08/29 5:42, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 28/08/2013 14:25, Masayoshi Okutsu wrote:
(adding core-libs-dev)
Hi Christian,
RFC 4647 defines The Language Priority List [1]. The use of
java.util.List would be a natural fit, which is the reason why List
is used. But use of Iterable does work (as API design). The parameter
name `priorityIterable' sounds a bit odd, though.
Does use of Iterable add much value to the API? (Please note that
List is also used in Locale.LanguageRange.)
It depends on the usages but Iterable would be a bit more flexible.
Does the locale matcher require to do anything except iterate over the
elements? The return could be looked at it but it depends on the
typical usage -- would the user of the API typically just iterate over
the matched Locales?
-Alan.
