commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Benson <>
Subject Re: [Lang] Pair toString
Date Mon, 11 Apr 2011 14:12:29 GMT
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Gary Gregory <> wrote:
> Hi All:
> I added a test to verify the default Pair toString behavior.
> For me to replace our custom Pair class at work, I need to customize the to
> String behavior.
> Subclassing ImmutablePair and MutablePair to override toString smells nasty.
> What about adding a formatString ivar which will be used with the
> String.format API?

If we must do anything like this it would seem that by the laws of dog
food we would accept Builder<String>.  That said, I'm finding it
difficult to see a way to do this that doesn't seem equally offensive
as the subclassing approach you've rejected.  For a different
subclassing approach you could implement toString() at a single
point--a direct Pair subclass--and then reimplement mutable and
immutable versions if you really needed both.  Or if your toString()
needs are nonspecific enough, maybe we can just use them--I'm not
unduly attached to the current format.


> --
> Thank you,
> Gary

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message