commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [LANG] unnecessary boxing in StringEscapeUtils etc.
Date Wed, 18 May 2011 15:37:30 GMT
The bigger issue in my mind is why a Range does not extend Pair. It's pretty
clear (to me at least) that a range is a pair of values.

Because the Pair is in our tuple package, it means that it should follow
tuple logic and be an ordered list of elements, in this case two elements.

This means that the methods that Range has that are not in Pair could be
moved there.

Gary

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 9:53 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm not happy with the boxing that is often needed to create a Range
> of int or long, e.g. in StringEscapeUtils.
>
> Seems to me that the UnicodeEscaper and NumericEntityEscaper classes
> should require ints rather than a Range, as this would cut down on the
> boxing and unboxing that is currently needed, as well as the extra
> code needed to provide comparisons etc.
>
> Or, there could be a specialised IntRange class using int to provide
> the functionality.
>
> These changes are new to 3.0, so could be fixed now without backward
> compat. problems.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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