commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rahul Akolkar" <rahul.akol...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [collections] Generics & the collection subpackage
Date Sat, 04 Nov 2006 01:42:08 GMT
On 11/3/06, Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> There has been reltively little feedback on these backwards incompatible
> changes. Do I assume (by lazy consensus) that [collections-generics]
> will be seriously backwards incompatible? Can I commit changes? Are we
> agreed on the strategy "produce the best API", rather than "produce a
> compatible API".
>
<snip/>

We don't need everyone to agree (assuming commits go to the jdk5 branch).

[collections] has had a good life, perhaps its time for a makeover. I see it as:

a) Produce a lean jdk5 worthy API, remove jdk redundancy, generify
b) There could be a separate exercise to generify with BC, if anyone is upto it
c)  Stare at (a) as [collections-generics/collections5] and (b) as
[collections]++ and decide -- only needed if (b) comes to exist

-Rahul


> Stephen
>
>
> Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> > First analysis of the collection subpackage of [collections] for the
> > generics branch.
> >
> > - BoundedCollection should be deleted/renamed to Bounded
> > new Bounded interface would not implement Collection, allowing it to be
> > implemented by Maps as well as Collections
> >
> > - UnmodifiableBoundedCollection should be deleted
> > Just use the isFull/maxSize methods on CollectionUtils or similar
> >
> > - AbstractSerializedCollectionDecorator should be deleted
> > Serialization can now be rolled up into the base decorator
> > This simplifies a lot of code
> > It wasn't done originally due to back-compat
> >
> > - TransformedCollection will need some thinking about to generify, as a
> > transformer can change object types
> >
> > - Consider adding a Decorator interface
> > This would provide a single method decorated() that obtains the
> > collection that has been decorated.
> > Whilst useful, this is also potentially dangerous exposure of state.
> >
> > - Consider adding a Container interface
> > This would be a base super interface for Collection and Map (but
> > obviously we can't hack the JDK.
> >
> > - Consider whether UnmodifiableCollection should be deleted as it
> > duplicates the JDK.
> >
> > Stephen
> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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