commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stephen Colebourne" <>
Subject Re: [lang] Reflection or not?
Date Mon, 08 Jul 2002 21:18:45 GMT
> On Fri, 5 Jul 2002 wrote:
> > Here are my questions and opinions.
> >
> > Q: Do you consider commons-lang only an extension to java.lang or to
> > java.lang *and* it's subpackages?
> > A: I would consider it an extension to java.lang *and* it's subpackages.
> Agreed. Lang maps to lang.*, lang's subpackages unless it's felt that Sun
> made a major mistake in a lang class or subpackage, to primitive types and
> possibly to arrays. Arrays encroaches on collections a little due to
> java.util.Arrays.

I would agree with lang.reflect for Class, Method, Constructor, Field
utility classes

> > Q: Can we add reflection functionality without overlapping with
> > Commons-BeanUtils?
> > A: This depends on what functionality people have in mind.
> org.apache.commons.lang.reflect.* would have to be limited to helper
> functionality for java.lang.reflect.*. The second we start to have some
> kind of new layer being created above java.lang.reflect, then I think we
> should start to question whether the code should be in Lang.

See below

> > Q: Can we add reflection possibility without introducing new
> > A: Commons-lang should only have the JDK libraries as its dependency for
> > users of commons-lang. JUnit required for testing purposes.
> There were a lot of threads bouncing around about '[reflect]'. Many were
> on a project that would not be suitable for Lang because it was too high
> level. Stephen suggested the movement of some core functionality from
> BeanUtils into Lang. I need to review the threads more, but I believe that
> is the main focus on commons.lang.reflect.

I still want to get a reflect area going, however that is no longer the
correct name for the new sandbox project. Nor is it my top priority. I do
want to get the 'real' reflect part into lang however. This should contain
utility methods similar to those on the current BeanUtils' MethodUtils class
and Lang's Classes. It should not contain fancy functionality, data
structures, search mechanisms etc. Again though, this discussion should be
deferred until lang is promoted to commons proper. (I would still desire the
code to then go in before 1.0, but I can be persuaded otherwise if


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

View raw message