commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael A. Smith" <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] (re-vote) XxxUtils constructors
Date Thu, 22 Aug 2002 19:49:45 GMT
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On 8/22/02 3:16 PM, "Henri Yandell" <> wrote:
> > What would be the Velocity change needed for this? Could someone who knows
> > velocity show me how velocity usage of StringUtils looks now and how it
> > would look with this change?
> > 
> > Vel is always on my todo list it seems.
> What would I change in Velocity?  I would fork the string utils code and
> bring it back into velocity or turbine

so, you're saying that unless StringUtils remains exactly as it was when 
it existed in velocity or Turbine, then you'll fork it and just keep it 
in velocity or turbine?  

The answer to Hen's question is this:

Reference to org.apache.commons.lang.StringUtils as the name of the bean 
class being used (wherever it might be used) would need to change to 

That's it.  

> Pain in the ass, but beats this inanity.  To avoid arguing with the purists
> over coding conventions

Sorry to be a pain in the ass, but...

>  public StringUtils() {
>  }
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -0
> [X] -1    

for the many reasons "privateers" have expressed before...

But I will gladly change my vote if you can explain why the bean wrapper
doesn't work.  I have yet to see anyone provide any commentary about the
idea other than Stephen and the question from Hen.


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

View raw message