Matt Benson wrote: > --- On Tue, 5/5/09, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: >> I'm trying to remember myself! :) I would think >> collections, since >> that's what this email was regarding. Is there a >> branch that gets rid >> of Transformer, Closure, and Predicate from collections and >> instead >> uses Functor's versions of these concepts? That's >> what I'd like to >> see (aside from the fact that I'd have to rewrite all my >> nifty >> transformers). > > That subject probably requires a debate. Stephen didn't want to completely > switch to [functor].
I think its really important that [collections] has no dependencies. As part of that, I'd also suggest that [functor] shouldn't have dependencies. While I understand the arguments of just picking up another jar if your using it, of tools like maven, and of eating dog food, when push comes to shove, I believe that one of the core conceptual attributes of [collections] is that it stands alone. The list archives contains more detailed discussion on this for those wanting to hunt it down ;-) Given that I am removed from the coding aspects of this these days, I won't -1 any decisions on this. But I will register that I believe my position very strongly. Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
