incubator-clerezza-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tsuyoshi Ito <>
Subject Re: extending GraphNode with generics
Date Fri, 20 May 2011 10:45:37 GMT

I am using quite often subtypes of GraphNode in my projects for a
specific domain. I have also seen Decorators/Wrappers of GraphNode in
other projects. So, currently I don't see the benefit of the proposed
change in clerezza. I think users should extend GraphNode for their
specific needs - or what kind of subtypes do you propose for clerezza,


2011/5/20 Reto Bachmann-Gmür <>:
> I think it is very straight forward to add a generic type to graphnode. It needs changing
lots of code to prevent warning, in most cases i think we have to add a <?> or <Resource>,
the situation where we actually have a method declared to return an objetc with a concrete
type param are relatively seldom.
> What motivates the change? Graphnode is a convenience object, where not all methods are
usable for every instance. Rather than having generics we could also just have 3 or 4 subtypes,
in this cas we could not just have more concrete return types for getNode but also have methods
that only apply to a specifc type.
> But again, seeing where you think the change would bring concrete benefits would make
it easier to discuss the proposal.
> Cheers,
> reto
> ----- Original message -----
>> On 20 May 2011, at 00:13, Tommaso Teofili wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > as discussed in CLEREZZA-537 it may be worth having GraphNodes use
>> > generics to add something like "T extends Resource" parameter allowing
>> > easiest subject type retrieving (avoiding useless casts, as said by
>> > Henry); I plan to create a patch tomorrow so that anyone can review it
>> > and we can discuss it (in a new issue).
>> > Regards,
>> > Tommaso
>> +1 for me. Be interested to see how it works out.
>> Henry
>> Social Web Architect

View raw message