Victor Mauricio Pazos wrote: > Ok, then you are right. I think that using CQL as utility is better option > because it hides the implementation (the "new" statement) then we resolve > future maintenance problems. > > I only would suggest a bit change in the protocol signatures thinking in > legibility and flexibility: > > col = features.getFeatures( CQL.toFilter( "POP_2000 > 100000" ) ); > col = features.getFeatures( CQL.toFilter( "POP_2000 > 100000", > filterFactory) ); > Cool! Oh and about the module maintainer request; I would be happy to recommend you as a module maintainer for main (so you can continue to be the authority on the CQL stuff). My response was more based on the need for CQL then anything with respect to abilities/trust :-D
Jody ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
