Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-14 Thread Stephen Colebourne
ppening. > > > > Stephen > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Gary Gregory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "'Jakarta Commons Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 9:54 PM > &g

RE: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-10 Thread Gary Gregory
wards compatibility in mind with the functionality I desire, what would it look like? Thanks, Gary > -Original Message- > From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 14:28 > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [lang] ArrayUtils

Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-10 Thread Stephen Colebourne
#x27;Jakarta Commons Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 9:54 PM Subject: RE: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse > I've not heard back on this last post. > > So... is my idea below not acceptable because it breaks the API signature > for

RE: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-10 Thread Gary Gregory
ary Gregory [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 15:10 > To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List' > Subject: RE: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse > > Hmm... my main proposal seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle (sorry, > couldn't resist). &

Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-08 Thread Stephen Colebourne
m not feeling the requirement to have reverseCopy() ATM Stephen > Thoughts? > > Gary > > > -Original Message- > > From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 13:20 > > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > > S

RE: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-08 Thread Gary Gregory
cutTheDeck(ArrayUtils.shuffleHere(ArrayUtils.shuffleThere(deck))) ; Etc. Gary > -Original Message- > From: __matthewHawthorne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 14:58 > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse > > I do

Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-08 Thread __matthewHawthorne
returns its arg. 3) do not add reverseAsCopy until someone asks for it. Thoughts? Gary -Original Message- From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 13:20 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse I would agree that re

RE: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-08 Thread Gary Gregory
[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 13:20 > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse > > I would agree that reverse() should probably return the array, however > this > is a nasty backwards compatable change, seems harmless but

Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-08 Thread Stephen Colebourne
t; > -Original Message- > > From: __matthewHawthorne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 12:09 > > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > > Subject: Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse > > > > I think it's a good idea, but I lik

Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-08 Thread __matthewHawthorne
pe array[]) Makes copying the most prominent verb, not quite right IMHO. (2.3) reverse(type array[], boolean copyFirst) Barf. Gary -Original Message- From: __matthewHawthorne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 12:09 To: Jakarta Commons Developer

RE: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-08 Thread Gary Gregory
ist > Subject: Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse > > I think it's a good idea, but I like method that returns void also, > because it may save memory by modifying the input array. > > Maybe your suggested method should be renamed to: > > Object[] copyReverse(final Object[]

Re: [lang] ArrayUtils.reverse

2003-10-08 Thread __matthewHawthorne
I think it's a good idea, but I like method that returns void also, because it may save memory by modifying the input array. Maybe your suggested method should be renamed to: Object[] copyReverse(final Object[] array) and be modified to not operate on the argument, but instead create a copy of