These discussions on HashMap have me concerned. I asked why this
project was developing its own collection classes a while ago but the
answer was less than satisfying. Seeing folks spending their time
benchmarking internally developed HashMap implementations vs using the
JDK really makes me wonder.
IIRC the answer I was given was that Pivot needs variations of the
Collection classes - that they need to contain methods that aren't in
the standard collection classes.
If that about sums it up then I think you need to revisit the problem.
There are much better ways to add extensions to classes then
reimplementing them. And having your own Map & List interfaces as well
as implementations with the same names (albeit in different packages)
as those in the JDK and that aren't based on the JDK interfaces is
going to result in perpetual confusion by anyone picking up this
project, especially since they are exposed to applications using the
project.
Yes, I understand that java.util.Map isn't a collection. But the cure
seems to be worse than the solution.
Ralph
