Ralph
On Aug 25, 2009, at 8:43 AM, Greg Brown wrote:
This has been discussed at length.
And will continue to be every time someone new starts to participate
in the project. If you really enjoy dealing with that then don't do
anything about it.
Please review the FAQ for the reasons behind Pivot's collection
implementations.
http://cwiki.apache.org/PIVOT/frequently-asked-questions-faq.html
Yes, I've read them. None of them justify doing this to yourselves or
your users. There are much better ways to accomplish your goals.
Ralph
On Aug 25, 2009, at 11:37 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
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
