equire [lang]
> > should be placed in [lang]. Implementations depending on [beanutils]
> > belong in [beanutils].
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Henri Yandell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 11:55 AM
> > To: Jakarta Commo
ns of [functor] interfaces that require [lang]
> should be placed in [lang]. Implementations depending on [beanutils]
> belong in [beanutils].
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Henri Yandell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 11:55 AM
> To: Jakar
faces that require [lang]
should be placed in [lang]. Implementations depending on [beanutils]
belong in [beanutils].
-Original Message-
From: Henri Yandell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 11:55 AM
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
Subject: RE: [collections]
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Ola Berg wrote:
> The thing is: should [functor] contain the util classes with default
> implementations etc. If so, I am compelled to say that it should go into
> [lang].
In my opinion, yes [functor] should contain the most basic and common
Functor implementations. You're o
>> Does it matter if [functor] and [lang] have circular dependencies? Not
>> that they will.
Ola:
> Yes, that does matter.
> The thing is: should [functor] contain the util classes with default
implementations etc. If so, I am compelled to say that it should go into
[lang].
There is no real req
> it appears that [functor] will need to depend on [lang] for exception
> nesting.
>
> hopefully, lang will not need to depend on functor. if it does, then maybe
> it shows that the factoring has gone a bit wrong and we need to think
> about it again.
No, I don't agree. Functors would be very
> Does it matter if [functor] and [lang] have circular dependencies? Not
> that they will.
Yes, that does matter.
The thing is: should [functor] contain the util classes with default implementations
etc. If so, I am compelled to say that it should go into [lang].
/O
--
To unsubscribe, e-mai
> > Does it matter if [functor] and [lang] have circular dependencies? Not
> > that they will.
>
> it appears that [functor] will need to depend on [lang] for exception
> nesting.
>
> hopefully, lang will not need to depend on functor. if it does, then maybe
> it shows that the factoring has gone a
On Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 08:39 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Thus the only viable solutions are:
Solution (a)
functors in [lang]
[collections] depends on [lang]
Solution (b)
functors in [functor]
[collections] depends on [functor]
Solut
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> Thus the only viable solutions are:
>
> Solution (a)
> functors in [lang]
> [collections] depends on [lang]
>
> Solution (b)
> functors in [functor]
> [collections] depends on [functor]
>
> Solution (c)
> functors in [collections]
>
> Any more vie
On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> From: "Rodney Waldhoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> > > Solution #3 [functor] project, that contains the functor interfaces,
> > > implementations and CollectionUtils implementations, with the
> > > collect
On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> Solution #3
> [functor] project, that contains the functor interfaces, implementations and
> CollectionUtils implementations, with the collections interfaces and
> CollectionUtils code deprecated in favour of the functor ones.
In this scenario, why
12 matches
Mail list logo
