commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stephen Colebourne" <>
Subject [Lang][Util] Merge lang and util ? [was Re: [Lang] Add Factory and Identifier to Lang]
Date Sat, 22 Jun 2002 17:24:41 GMT
Another thread has indicated that Lang and Util seem to be eternally in the
sandbox, and never make it to commons proper. I suggest the reason is at
least in part that they are too small to stand alone.

Avalon and collections threads have indicated that there are lots of ideas
for *very* low level code. But noone quite wants to commit to whether they
are lang, util or have to live in their own small component.
ct/Thread/ etc.)

I suggest the answer is to merge Lang and Util into one. A component with
sufficient momentum, with sufficient developers, with sufficient useful
classes that it becomes *essential* to other commons projects to use it. A
component that can actually make it to commons proper. If a new name is
needed fine - but this distinction between lang and util seems very
artificial (its blurred in Java too).

I believe that most if not all commons projects _should_ be using a common
core, but I am unconvinced that if Lang and Util were promoted today that
_any_ commons project would actually choose to link to them. For me, this is
not because of lack of tests or lack of useful code, but because of lack of

My proposal would read along the lines of:
"xxx is a component to provide essential utility code useful to all
projects. Specific utilities are provided for the classes in java.lang and
java.util, with the exception of collections. Also present is functionality
that ideally should be present in the JDK."

One thread used the term 'Organic' for the growth of commons. Is it time for
a little pruning? Opinions?

getting worried that all he's doing is proposing refactoring, but feeling
compelled to do so ;-)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Henri Yandell" <>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <>
Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2002 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Lang] Add Factory and Identifier to Lang

> -1. These aren't Lang things. They seem to me to be more a question of
> making a common set of interfaces for patterns.
> A package I have for myself is com.xx.patterns. Then inside that I have a
> Null interface for showing if something implements the Null pattern, and a
> set of Registrys for things that implement the Registry pattern [okay, not
> really the right name for a pattern, is a name my colleagues and I used
> for Factories with modifiable state].
> Lang is for things that map to java.lang or very core types, but not for
> things that just seem very very generic.
> Just my -1,
> Hen
> On Sat, 22 Jun 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> > I would like to add the following to Lang
> >
> > public interface Factory {
> >   public Object create();
> > }
> >
> > plus associated FactoryUtils class
> >
> >
> > public interface Identifiable {
> >  public String getIdentifier() {
> > }
> >
> > plus associated IdentifiableUtils class (depends on Factory, as creating
> > identifier should be pluggable)
> >
> > Any opinions?
> >
> > Stephen
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> >
> >
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message