Before making changes to the data structure I think it would be good to understand the use case.
Bruce, can can you give a high level description of the issue you are trying to solve? Cheers, Britt On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 7:38 PM, jay vyas <jayunit100.apa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Im not a ctakes expert by any means, but in general, I like that idea.... > predictable and deterministic ordering of mapped elements almost always > leads to less buggy applications. > As groovy has shown (LinkedHashMap is the default data structure and its > much easier imo to get reproducible groovy unit tests etc b/c of that). > > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Bruce Tietjen < > bruce.tiet...@perfectsearchcorp.com> wrote: > > > Since I started working with cTakes some time ago, I have found it > > difficult to compare the output between subsequent runs on the same files > > because annotations are often assigned different IDs, are listed in > > different order, etc. > > > > One area that seems to be a cause for at least some of these differences > is > > the common use of HashMap where enumerating the contents is not > guaranteed > > to return items in the same order they were added. > > > > I would like to work towards addressing this issue by changing those > areas > > of the code where it matters to use a LinkedHashMap instead. > > > > Is this something the community would be interested in and find helpful? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Bruce Tietjen > > Perfect Search Corp. > > > > > > -- > jay vyas >
