commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Arun Thomas" <Arun.Tho...@solidusnetworks.com>
Subject RE: [lang] nIndexOf/ordinalIndexOf
Date Tue, 26 Aug 2003 18:34:20 GMT
You've seen my vote for the former, but the latter also seems to suggest that the returned
value will be the index of the ordinal in the string.  'Course, the arg list should clarify
(for what else could searchStr be?) but still....

-AMT

-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Gregory [mailto:ggregory@seagullsw.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 10:56 AM
To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'
Subject: RE: [lang] nIndexOf/ordinalIndexOf


Just for arg's sake:

1) ordinalIndexOf (String str, String searchStr, int ordinal)
2) indexOfOrdinal (String str, String searchStr, int ordinal)

Gary


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arun Thomas [mailto:Arun.Thomas@solidusnetworks.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 10:02
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: [lang] nIndexOf/ordinalIndexOf
> 
> I've got to say that I like the parallelism with the other methods.
> 
> For what it's worth, I like: ordinalIndexOf(String str, String 
> searchStr, int ordinal)
> 
> -AMT
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gary Gregory [mailto:ggregory@seagullsw.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 11:27 PM
> To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'
> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release of Commons Lang 2.0 [take 2]
> 
> 
> Inline:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Phil Steitz [mailto:phil@steitz.com]
> > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 23:11
> > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release of Commons Lang 2.0 [take 2]
> >
> > Gary Gregory wrote:
> > > Ah, well, in that sprit, then comments on 
> > > http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22719 would be
> > appreciated
> > > but I do not expect this to go in 2.0 unless other folks like/need 
> > > it.
> >
> > Looks useful to me. I would go ahead and add it. Here are a couple 
> > of small comments:
> >
> > 1. Yes, the name sucks, but nothing nice jumps out at me. Of the 
> > alternatives that you have listed, I like "indexOfOccurrence" the 
> > best. Another one to consider might be "ordinalIndexOf".
> 
> b/w the 2, I like indexOfOccurrence better but let's see what other 
> folks like.
> 
> >
> > 2. Make sure to change the method names in the javadoc examples to 
> > match the chosen name.  Also, the last two examples should probably 
> > be replaced by one using a * for the integer argument.
> 
> I am not fond of that one since I would need to put a "x" or "i" or 
> something that is not the real answer to the example and since the 
> point of the method is to pass in a count, an example for both 1 and 2 
> is nice. I could add another entry with * and "i" I guess.
> 
> gg
> 
> >
> > Phil
> >
> > >
> > > Gary
> > >
> > >
> > >>-----Original Message-----
> > >>From: Phil Steitz [mailto:phil@steitz.com]
> > >>Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 20:24
> > >>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> > >>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release of Commons Lang 2.0 [take 2]
> > >>
> > >>Gary Gregory wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>I'll take the blame for causing any confusion on this one since I 
> > >>>had committed these Javadoc changes "during" the vote, which was 
> > >>>made more difficult due to the extremely long email delays caused 
> > >>>by the current
> > >>
> > >>batch
> > >>
> > >>>of viruses going 'round.
> > >>>
> > >>>My thought was that we were indeed voting on the build based on 
> > >>>tagged sources and that any new commits would be in a post >2.0 
> > >>>release (even though, these changes being Javadoc changes are 
> > >>>"harmless" and
> > >>
> > >>beneficial to
> > >>
> > >>>the release IMHO ;-)
> > >>>
> > >>>If we want to implement a code freeze in our environment on top 
> > >>>of
> > using
> > >>>tags, we could do that. I guess we'd have to vote on it too :-)
> > >>
> > >>Sorry if I misunderstood things. I thought we were still adding 
> > >>things to the release. I see no reason to freeze code if we have a 
> > >>tagged release.  I am +1 for releasing the code prior to the 
> > >>javadoc changes that occurred during the vote or to adding them 
> > >>and retagging. If that requires a new vote, then I am OK with that 
> > >>as well.
> > >>
> > >>In any case, we should not have to stop everything as we wait for 
> > >>the release to go. I would also very much like to see 2.0 get out 
> > >>the door.
> > >>
> > >>Phil
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>Gary
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>-----Original Message-----
> > >>>>From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
> > >>>>Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 00:00
> > >>>>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> > >>>>Subject: RE: [VOTE] Release of Commons Lang 2.0 [take 2]
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>Well, if there is a question about policy/process, why not just
> > freeze
> > >>>>
> > >>>>the
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>code and restart the vote?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>By tagging the CVS, he effectively has frozen the code for the
> > Release.
> > >>>
> > >>I
> > >>
> > >>>>was simply curious about the policy because, as I said, other 
> > >>>>projects
> > >>>
> > >>are
> > >>
> > >>>>stricter.  For example the HTTPd team has different rules 
> > >>>>(http://httpd.apache.org/dev/release.html).
> > >>>>
> > >>>>A Release Manager makes a release build, and it is automatically

> > >>>>an
> > >>>
> > >>alpha.
> > >>
> > >>>>It becomes a beta release when at least three Committers have 
> > >>>>voted
> > beta
> > >>>>status, and there are more +1 than -1.  It becomes a GA release

> > >>>>when
> > at
> > >>>>least three Committers vote for GA (stable) status, and there 
> > >>>>are more
> > >>>
> > >>+1
> > >>
> > >>>>than -1.  Notice that -1 is not a veto.  Notice, also, that the
> > package
> > >>>>itself may go through multiple status changes, but no packaging
> > changes.
> > >>>>The only allowable change is renaming the file to reflect the 
> > >>>>change
> > in
> > >>>>status; exceptions can be made if a change in the contents of 
> > >>>>the
> > >>>
> > >>tarball
> > >>
> > >>>>(e.g., someone forgot to add the LICENSE file).  Otherwise, if a
> > change
> > >>>
> > >>in
> > >>
> > >>>>the CVS needs to be incorporated, it becomes a new release (with

> > >>>>a new vote).
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Other projects, such as Avalon, also roll jars and then vote on

> > >>>>them
> > as
> > >>>
> > >>a
> > >>
> > >>>>Release.  So I was just asking to understand what is established

> > >>>>as
> > >>>
> > >>policy
> > >>
> > >>>>here.  I wasn't challenging Henri's release.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>	--- Noel
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>>>--
> > >>>>---
> > >>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > >>>>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>--
> > >>-
> > >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > >>For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

Mime
View raw message