commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: FormattableUtils
Date Mon, 25 Apr 2011 13:26:50 GMT
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Henri Yandell <flamefew@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Henri Yandell <flamefew@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > Hi All:
> >>> >
> >>> > Now that we have the shiny and new FormattableUtils class, what are
> the
> >>> > other opportunities in [lang] to eat our own dog food?
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> What did you have in mind?
> >>>
> >>
> >> I am just wondering what other [lang] classes should be Formattable.
> >> StopWatch for example?
> >
> > Having hijacked the thread; possible Formattables that jump out:
> >
> > Fraction
> > Range
> > StopWatch
> > The Mutables (or maybe Formatter knows special things about Number
> already)
> > BitField
>
> So I think the full potential list is the above plus StrBuilder,
> CharSet and JavaVersion.
>
> I'm not sure if it makes sense for each; but those are our current
> custom business objects.
>
> I'm scratching my head over Pair a bit though. What benefit did we add
> by implementing Formattable? My off-hand comment was hoping we would
> replace Gary's need to have his own subclass just to change the
> format, but he still needs that.
>
> I'm also not sure of the benefit of FormattableUtils.append. We pass a
> CharSequence in and do much what the JDK would do on the toString?
>
> It almost feels that we need to add our own Formattable interface, but
> instead of formatTo we would have toString(String format). That's a
> weak API though. Users can't dictate whether the left or right comes
> first for the Pair example, they're stuck with left then right. The
> 'better' solution is to have a PairFormat class that has its own
> custom pattern language (%L and %R etc).
>
> What am I missing?
>
> Currently I feel that we can dump FormattableUtils, simplify the
> toString on Pair and tell Gary to suck it up, and then go do a bunch
> of testing to see if the Mutables will work with String.format's
> numerical flags (I'm suspecting it doesn't, making these irritating to
> use and in need of some javadoc to warn the user).
>
>
Ug, what we have now seems worse than what we have before.

ATM, the least worse Pair solution for me is to be able to say, for example:

aPair.toString("(%1$s: %2$s)");

The fact that a pair is 'Formattable' is different. How can I say the above
with Formattable? I cannot. I will add back toString(String formatString)

I do not think we need %L and %R if we document that %1 is 'left' and %2 is
'right'.

Maybe I am missing something too! :)

Gary

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


-- 
Thank you,
Gary

http://garygregory.wordpress.com/
http://garygregory.com/
http://people.apache.org/~ggregory/
http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message