A map interface should be fine. I've been slowly refactoring this code but I'm not really done yet.
The implementation should remain a BinaryTree because we need to efficiently lookup from both the key side and the value side. Regards, Glen Stampoultzis (TriNexus Pty Ltd) Fixed:+61 3 9753-6850 Mob:+61 (0)402 835 458 ICQ: 62722370 EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL's: http://jakarta.apache.org/poi, http://www.krysalis.org > In trying to do STRING records for formulas, i was looking at the SST > serializer and deserializer. In both of them, there is a BinaryTree object > called "strings" that is used to hold strings. Withing these classes, only the > Map interface methods are used, and the BinaryTree methods are used only from > SSTRecord. I am therefore planning at changing the interface for SSTSerializer > and Deserializer to accept a generic Map. > > So, was there any other reason why its a BinaryTree reference internally? Else > i will go ahead and do that change. It'll help me in string record. > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
