commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From __matthewHawthorne <ma...@phreaker.net>
Subject Re: [collections] general problem with decorators
Date Fri, 03 Oct 2003 01:26:31 GMT
I would prefer something like:

OrderedSet.defaultInstance()

or

OrderedSet.newInstance()

It seems more standard... what do you think?




Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> This sounds OK, but what would the method be called?
> 
> OrderedSet.decorate()
> OrderedSet.decorateHashSet()
> 
> ?
> Stephen
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Henri Yandell" <bayard@generationjava.com>
> 
>>Basically, the lack of empty constructors with default decoration
>>decisions. Example I'm looking at:
>>
>>I want an OrderedSet. The only way to get this is:
>>
>>OrderedSet.decorate( new HashSet() )
>>
>>[okay, could do TreeSet etc, also could use MapUtils].
>>
>>I don't know about you, but this feels odd. :) Especially as the user
>>knows that HashSet is unordered, so why provide it.
>>
>>This may be a unique example, but it seems that we could choose a default
>>empty map for each one.
>>
>>Just a view..
>>
>>Hen
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>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