commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Phil Steitz" <p...@steitz.com>
Subject Re: [collections] general problem with decorators
Date Sat, 04 Oct 2003 00:24:39 GMT
Call me the odd man out, but it is not obvious to me that a decorator 
*should* include an instance factory.  This seems odd to me.

If instance factories really are necessary, might it not make more sense 
to add them to the *Utils classes instead?

Phil

__matthewHawthorne wrote:
> Sometimes, I wish there was such a thing as static interitance.  Either 
> that or some type of code generation could be used, maybe?  Could 
> velocity do this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> 
>> newInstance is probably best. Although its certainly not a fun job going
>> through all the decorators to add this. Any patch volunteers?
>>
>> Stephen
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Todd Jonker" <toddster@speakeasy.net>
>> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>;
>> "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
>> Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 7:07 PM
>> Subject: Re: [collections] general problem with decorators
>>
>>
>>
>>> I like newInstance.  Unlike defaultInstance, it clearly allocates a new
>>
>>
>> object.   defaultInstance sounds singleton-y.
>>
>>> .T.
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: __matthewHawthorne [mailto:matth@phreaker.net]
>>>> Sent: Friday, October 3, 2003 01:26 AM
>>>> To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'
>>>> Subject: Re: [collections] general problem with decorators
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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