[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMMONSRDF-7?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15611411#comment-15611411
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on COMMONSRDF-7:
-----------------------------------------
GitHub user stain opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-commonsrdf/pull/26
COMMONSRDF-7 RDFTerm/Triple/Quad are immutable
[COMMONSRDF-7](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMMONSRDF-7)
also clarify `RDFTerm.equals()` and `RDFTerm.hashCode()`
by delegation to its specializations IRI/BlankNode/Literal
Suggested javadoc:
*
[RDFTerm](http://stain.github.io/incubator-commonsrdf/COMMONSRDF-7/org/apache/commons/rdf/api/RDFTerm.html)
*
[Triple](http://stain.github.io/incubator-commonsrdf/COMMONSRDF-7/org/apache/commons/rdf/api/Triple.html)
*
[Quad](http://stain.github.io/incubator-commonsrdf/COMMONSRDF-7/org/apache/commons/rdf/api/Quad.html)
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/apache/incubator-commonsrdf COMMONSRDF-7
Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-commonsrdf/pull/26.patch
To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:
This closes #26
----
commit cdc76af17932dcdd4c27cf1842445e5f5a90ae46
Author: Stian Soiland-Reyes <[email protected]>
Date: 2016-10-27T09:56:38Z
COMMONSRDF-7 RDFTerm/Triple/Quad are immutable
also clarify RDFTerm.equals() and RDFTerm.hashCode()
by delegation to its specializations IRI/BlankNode/Literal
----
> Document that RDFTerm, Triple and Quad are immutable
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: COMMONSRDF-7
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMMONSRDF-7
> Project: Apache Commons RDF
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: api
> Reporter: Stian Soiland-Reyes (old)
> Assignee: Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Labels: discussion, immutable
> Fix For: 0.3.0
>
>
> From https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/issues/57
> ansell:
> {quote}
> As mentioned in #45, should we add a contract requirement that all RDFTerm
> instances (and Triple?) be implemented as immutable objects?
> https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/issues/45
> {quote}
> stain:
> {quote}
> +1, if we say SHOULD. But only the exposed RDFTerm++ methods need to be
> immutable - so this should probably go into each of their descriptions. So if
> I have a getDatabaseThingie() method that can be mutable.
> {quote}
> ansell:
> {quote}
> The value of stating that the objects must be immutable is decreased if it
> only applies to the results of the API methods. A useful goal would be to
> ensure that the entire object is immutable to give a guarantee about
> threadsafety, but that may be too much for all implementations to support.
> Just stating that the results of the visible API methods are immutable
> doesn't help much. It is also not likely to apply to the methods that return
> Optional, as to enable serialisation, the actual field may not be an Optional
> itself in most cases.
> {quote}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
