commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <>
Subject Re: [lang] what about mutable BigInteger etc.
Date Fri, 27 Dec 2002 08:59:02 GMT

On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Ola Berg wrote:

> On 2002-12-23 at 19:05 Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> > However, I would not be averse to adding mutable versions of the Number
> > classes to math. I would want to see the complete set however,
> > MutableBigDecimal, MutableBigInteger, MutableInteger, MutableLong,
> > MutableDouble, MutableFloat and MutableFraction. They would need to be
> > Number subclasses.
> I think the word "mutable" leads wrong. The number in itself isn't
> mutable, it is the object that is told to hold a completely different
> number.

Doesn't this depend on the implementation? Why wouldn't they be
implemented as Numbers themselves and not containers?

> What about "container" or "holder" to indicate that it is something
> that more or less resembles a variable? You can assign different
> values to it but use it just as a literal (immutable) in any
> calculation, just as a variable.

MutableXxx matches the (hidden) Sun API in java.math.

Just my tuppence,


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

View raw message