On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 10:25:39AM -0400, Henri Yandell wrote:
> > > FastXxx classes say that they are not cross-platform, but in no way
> > > discuss which platforms they are targetted at. This makes these classes
> > > useless except to the authors.
> > IIRC, nobody can ever answer this question.
I personally have a problem with the use of the class name Singleton.
Singleton is a well known pattern for only having one instance of an
Object
in an environment, this class does not achive this. I would think a
name
likeSingleEntryIterator/TrivialIterator/MonoIterator or some such
would be a
Agreed. Trying to 'package' defensively :) SingletonListIterator could
become a static on SingletonIterator:
SingletonIterator.asListIterator(Object) or some such. Mainly just
trying
to make Collections easier to grokk.
I hate tricky solution. Compared with this, having two
SingletonIterator and
Subject: RE: [collections] Questions
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Takuya Murata [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 20 August 2003 12:14
> > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> > Subject: Re: [collections] Questions
> >
> > c
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> From: "Henri Yandell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Firstly, SingletonIterator and SingletonListIterator seem quite similar.
> > Apart from the extra type of 'ListIterator', it appears that a
> > SingletonListIterator can do the job of a SingletonIterat
> -Original Message-
> From: Takuya Murata [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 20 August 2003 12:14
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [collections] Questions
>
> class Singleton implements List {
> }
>
> ResetableIterator i = new Singl
> -Original Message-
> From: Takuya Murata [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 20 August 2003 11:55
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [collections] Questions
>
> A tricky situation is
>
> class A {
>public void method (Iterat
this sounds hugely dangerous - the javadocs for List#equals(Object) for
example stipulate:
Compares the specified object with this list for equality. Returns
true if
and only if the specified object is also a list, both lists have the
same
size, and all corresponding pairs of elements in the two
On Wednesday, August 20, 2003, at 12:41 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, Takuya Murata wrote:
Yes, this is in line with your proposal; we can use
SingletonListIterator for both Iterator and ListIterator. I think the
problem of this solution is users probably expect SingletonIterat
> -Original Message-
> From: Takuya Murata [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 20 August 2003 04:29
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [collections] Questions
>
>
> Hi,
>
> So the question is do we really need SingletonIterator
From: "Henri Yandell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Firstly, SingletonIterator and SingletonListIterator seem quite similar.
> Apart from the extra type of 'ListIterator', it appears that a
> SingletonListIterator can do the job of a SingletonIterator in all jobs.
> Could just remove SingleIterator.
True,
So the question is do we really need SingletonIterator and such. If we
want to eliminate the number of methods or classes, then what about one
class for all of collections or iterators? I suppose the use of
singleton methods and classes is almost always to provide an object
matching a data type
I think that the elimination of _unnecessary_ methods and classes is a
noble goal.
For example, In the SingletonIterator vs. SingletonListIterator
situation, as long as the logic to implement the extra methods specified
by java.util.ListIterator does not cause significant performance
overhead, i
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, Takuya Murata wrote:
> Yes, this is in line with your proposal; we can use
> SingletonListIterator for both Iterator and ListIterator. I think the
> problem of this solution is users probably expect SingletonIterator
> intuitively and might be puzzled why there is no such.
Hi,
So the question is do we really need SingletonIterator and such. If we
want to eliminate the number of methods or classes, then what about one
class for all of collections or iterators? I suppose the use of
singleton methods and classes is almost always to provide an object
matching a data
While this is a good question, it's not the actual problem I'm trying to
point out. SingletonIterator or singletonIterator() is a redundant method
in 99% of its usage. Only if someone has if(instanceof ListIterator) {.. }
else if(instanceof Iterator) would it change the funcationality.
Using XxxU
Hello,
Firstly, SingletonIterator and SingletonListIterator seem quite
similar.
Apart from the extra type of 'ListIterator', it appears that a
SingletonListIterator can do the job of a SingletonIterator in all
jobs.
Could just remove SingleIterator.
I was thinking can we eliminate those classes
17 matches
Mail list logo
