commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] (3b) XxxUtilsConstructors last chance
Date Thu, 22 Aug 2002 13:54:20 GMT
On 8/22/02 9:19 AM, "Henri Yandell" <bayard@generationjava.com> wrote:

> 
> 
>>>> 
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> 
>> On 8/21/02 7:30 PM, "Stephen Colebourne" <scolebourne@btopenworld.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>> Background (if you got bored by the threads)
>>>> - A static utility class has only static methods and fields
>>>> - Certain tools need instances of static utility classes
>>>> - These classes are not intended to be used as beans, hence private
>>>> constructors
>> 
>> These classes were *ORIGINALLY* used as beans, hence public contructors.
> 
> 'class', not 'classes' afaik.

Yes, you are correct.  Sorry.  (However, in my defense, this proposal was
mentioned as applying, in principle, to commons utils classes.... )


>If you focus on the single class in question
> then you're missing the point. Currently Collections has Utils with a
> private constructor, this means that the Collections project is off-limits
> to instance-using projects. If this is such a big issue that many Jakarta
> projects need instance Utils, then it's big enough that Commons needs to
> have a common view on it.

I don't think we need a common view...

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr. 
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message