commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <>
Subject Re: [collections] ArrayIterator
Date Tue, 18 Jun 2002 18:48:32 GMT

On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Michael A. Smith wrote:

> no objections to overloading the constructors.  I'm a bit concerned
> about the setArray method though.  I don't think it should exist in the
> first place, and adding more just makes it worse in my opinion -- you
> sholdn't be able to change the underlying array while iterating because
> it will result in unpredictable behavior.  Using an empty constructor
> and a setArray is analogous to making the ArrayIterator a bean, but an
> iterator should not be a bean -- it's not data.  Just my opinion I
> guess...

I'm +1 on not having the setArray [though I guess we have to deprecate it
etc]. Will just overload the constructor.


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

View raw message