commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simone Tripodi <>
Subject Re: [csv] Why does CSVFormat provide a validate() method instead of validating parameters passed to its constructor?
Date Fri, 16 Mar 2012 21:26:01 GMT
Hi all,

whatever name/pattern is called what we intend to apply, the result
doesn't change :P

Jokes a part, given the past experience of Digester3, as reported by
Matt and James, I can suggest you to not limit to users the
possibilities to chose their preferred approaches.

Digester3 - which of course has a larger set of APIs - allows users
configuring it with four APIs set:

 * plain old Digester2.X addRule() alike methods;
 * the RulesBinder fluent APIs;
 * Annotated POJOs, built on top of RulesBinder;
 * XML descriptors, built on top of RulesBinder.

no restrictions - just provide the n API layers that users want/need
on top of one in order to centralize the errors and make them
satisfied (which is he most important side, IMHO).
When developing Digester3, I wondered who would have used the xmlrules
today: pooff, magically a users not only is using it, he's also
contributing on making it betetr on supporting multi-thread

So, concluding: instead of choosing which approach has to be applied,
just apply both as Seb is proposing.
Just my 0.02 cents,

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:40 PM, James Carman
<> wrote:
> Did I say they were the same?
> On Mar 16, 2012 12:22 PM, "Emmanuel Bourg" <> wrote:
>> Le 16/03/2012 13:34, James Carman a écrit :
>>> +1 for builder pattern and fluent API
>> Fluent API != Builder Pattern
>> They are similar because they use method chaining, but that's not
>> equivalent.
>> Emmanuel Bourg
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.**<>
>> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message