Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 98064 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2002 19:49:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 5 Dec 2002 19:49:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 21914 invoked by uid 97); 5 Dec 2002 19:51:00 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 21878 invoked by uid 97); 5 Dec 2002 19:50:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 21859 invoked by uid 98); 5 Dec 2002 19:50:59 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4218 created Aug 14 2002) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 19:50:07 +0000 Subject: Re: [general] lang scope? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482) From: robert burrell donkin To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <33240C8EFB1F254EB11E19FD936AFA44F32CAC@Mail.CHEERS.HAATHI.COM> Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.482) X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Thursday, December 5, 2002, at 06:35 PM, Tom Drake wrote: > It sounds like I've jumped into a bit of a hornets nest. this is actually pretty tame :) but it's too late to jump of the frying pan... > I was thinking this morning that such a move will run a high risk of > creating a circular dependancy between [collections] and [lang][functor]. > It > seems likely that functors would want to use collection objects and > vice-versa. If I'm right about this, then all this code really belongs > under > the same package. (i don't have a deep understanding of the issues so this might be completely left field.) i suppose that it's the implementations rather than the interfaces that will depend on collection objects. this might point towards having a separate (possibly revamped) pattern component. the interfaces might live in lang and the implementations in pattern. pattern could depend on collection whereas collection could depend on lang. - robert > -----Original Message----- > From: Rodney Waldhoff [mailto:rwaldhoff@apache.org] > Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 9:47 AM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: [general] lang scope? (was Re: [collections][lang] Predicate > etc impls, was Re: commons-collections: New code contribution.) > > > > On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 scolebourne@btopenworld.com wrote: > >> The plan is to make [collections] depend on [lang] and deprecate the >> Predicate etc. interfaces in [collections]. > > At the risk of becoming increasingly unpopular with the lang folks, for > reasons similiar to those I enumerated in [1] (and others), I'm > uncomfortable with moving Predicate et al to lang. I'm having a lot of > trouble seeing lang as meeting the "Each package must have a clearly > defined purpose, scope, and API -- Do one thing well, and keep your > contracts." criterion. > > Don't get me wrong, I think all of this is great stuff, but why does it > all have to be in lang? If it doesn't meet the common reuse principle, it > should be in a different component. The current (i.e., released) contents > of o.a.c.lang, o.a.c.lang.builder, o.a.c.lang.enum and > o.a.c.lang.exception seem reasonably coherent, but I don't think the > either the functor or the reflection packages are a clean fit (with > respect to the CRP, R/REP, etc.), either with each other or the other > classes in lang. > > [1] > dev@jakarta.a > pache.org&msgNo=19869> > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: org> > For additional commands, e-mail: org> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: