--- James Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Matt Benson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Guys, I don't care what happens where--we can use
> > trunk for generics work, but I would like the
> option
> > of finishing a non-generic version of the lib
> (branch
> > is fine by me) so we can evaluate the difficulty
> of
> > swapping it out for the similar parts of a (also
> > non-generic) Collections 4.0.
> >
>
> My memory isn't all that great (and I'm too lazy to
> look it up). What
> are we talking about here? You want to swap what
> out of what (take
> stuff out of functor vs. take stuff out of
> collections)? I've always
> thought collections should use the Functor
> interfaces (instead of
> Transformer, Predicate, Factory, and Closure), but
> that was a lost
> cause (perhaps we could create some adapter
> classes). Is that what
> you mean?
Yes, it was my understanding that some form of
replacing [collections]' functors with [functor]'s
functors was a part of Stephen's goals for making
[collections] smaller. I am thinking that
[collections] 4.0+ might remove functor
implementations, keeping only the basic interfaces and
duck-type implementations from [functor] or elsewhere.
I am still fleshing this idea out but was going to
post to the list once I do.
-Matt
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total
Access, No Cost.
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
