commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <ggreg...@seagullsw.com>
Subject RE: [VOTE] New commons proper component - pcollections
Date Tue, 07 Oct 2003 18:04:27 GMT
1-, I think...

I am in favor of primitives support IN [collection] proper, /especially/
since 1.5 will not address this issue. For a feature that 1.4 or 1.5 would
address I would see as a good thing a separate Jar for pre-1.4 or pre-1.5
setups. For example, in [lang], having the nested exception classes in the
jar is obviously duplicative in a 1.4 setup.

Now, I do recall some thread on this list about primitives collections but I
do not recall if any agreement came on package names or 'jaring'.

My concerns are (feel free to pour gas and set on fire any of these):

(1) One more Jar file to keep track of on the class path, with this email
list, with our product build, our customers, etc. All the pain that comes
with having yet one more jar dependency in a product.

(2) Conceptually, [collections] is one nice lump. Splitting it for
collections of primitives vs. Objects is a subtlety I do not want 2 jars
for, 2 packages fine but not two jars. 

Will one jar depend on the other? 

Gary

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:scolebourne@btopenworld.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 17:06
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: [VOTE] New commons proper component - pcollections
> 
> The [collections] component has been housing unreleased, but stable
> primitive collections code for some time. These are collections that store
> primitive arrays behind the scenes instead of objects. (Note that JDK1.5
> does NOT address the need for these classes).
> 
> Following discussion within the [collections] component on the best
> release
> strategy, we would like to create a new commons-PROPER component to house
> the code. The aim is to give this useful code room to grow without
> impacting
> the widely used main [collections] (object-based) component.
> 
> It is important to emphasise that this is not new code - it is stable and
> ready for release. Thus commons-proper, rather than the sandbox, is the
> appropriate place for the new component.
> 
> The proposal is attached for the new component 'pcollections'. (No one
> likes
> this name, but we haven't found a better one).
> 
> Please vote as to whether you support this new commons-PROPER component.
> [  ] +1  Yes, lets create [pcollections]
> [  ] +0
> [  ] -0
> [  ] -1  No, I oppose this because....
> 
> Stephen

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message