directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lecharny <elecha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Some inconsistencies in the DN class
Date Thu, 17 Feb 2011 13:37:12 GMT
On 2/15/11 11:12 PM, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
>> The other constructors are most certainly spurious at this point :
>>
>>   Dn(Rdn child, Dn parent)
>>
>> can be replaced by :
>>
>>   parent.add( child );
>>
>> as the Dn is an immutable class.
>>
>> Is it ok for all of you ?
> I find it a bit inconvenient. If I see that a class has an "add()"
> method I expect that when using that method that the object is
> modified. I think I'd prefer to get rid of all the "add", "addAll" and
> "remove" methods that pretend mutability.

Thinking about it more, and after having discussed it with 
Pierre-Arnaud, I think you are right. The 'add' method are most 
certainly worthless.


-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel L├ęcharny
www.iktek.com


Mime
View raw message