Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of
 robertburrelldonkin@blueyonder.co.uk designates 195.188.213.9 as permitted
 sender)
Subject: RE: [VOTE] New commons proper component - collections-functors
From: robert burrell donkin <robertburrelldonkin@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0511301601080.27620-100000@shell3.shore.net>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0511301601080.27620-100000@shell3.shore.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 22:41:58 +0000
Message-Id: <1133390518.5507.69.camel@knossos.elmet>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 16:17 -0500, Michael Heuer wrote:
> robert burrell donkin wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 15:09 +0000, Tim Roberts wrote:
> > > +1 I support creating a functors library (but not necessarily called
> > > collections-functors).
> > >
> > > Rational:
> > > I think functors are a powerful approach to software design, under
> > > represented (in java) and non-standardised. I would like to see functors
> > > (sandbox) integrated and have a common interface set (and would like to help
> > > with such an undertaking). In addition to reducing the size of collections
> > > developers would, IMO, like to be able to use functors separately from
> > > collections.
> >
> > i'm beginning to suspect that there are number of secret functor users
> > out there...
> >
> > a lack of community prevented the functor component progressing from the
> > sandbox. perhaps times have changed and there may be now enough
> > momentum. would need a committer with enough time as well as enough
> > interested developers...
> >
> > opinions?
> 
> I think maybe you stated that backward -- the fact that the functor
> component was in the common sandbox may have prevented [functor] from
> gathering a community.  

not backward, just a bit circular :)

> How can a sandbox component gather users without a
> release?

that's why it's traditionally been tough for a component to progress
from the sandbox to proper. one reason for requiring a community is that
the core commons committers only have so many cycles so there's a
resistance to taking on components which may be self-sustaining. another
is that apache is interested in community development.  

so, it's really developers (rather than users) that are most important
for sandbox components. 

> There is a lot of functor-related activity out there:
> 
> Functor Objects (Wiki)
> > http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?FunctorObject
> 
> Blocks In Java (Wiki)
> > http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?BlocksInJava
> 
> jga - Generic Algorithms for Java
> > http://jga.sourceforge.net
> 
> Colt Project
> > http://dsd.lbl.gov/~hoschek/colt
> 
> More functor interfaces
> > http://www.dishevelled.org/functor

yep :)

the question is whether there's enough enthusiasm out there now to
sustain a commons generic functor component...

- robert


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org