jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marcel Reutegger <marcel.reuteg...@gmx.net>
Subject Re: SPI: usage of java.util.Properties in interfaces
Date Fri, 27 Oct 2006 11:51:53 GMT
Julian Reschke wrote:
> Marcel Reutegger schrieb:
>> I think both approaches have their disadvantages. Using a map requires 
>> casting to Strings (we currently have to stick with 1.4, I think) and 
>> Properties class exposes methods like store and load which are useless 
>> (or even dangerous).
> Well, SPI already uses generic Collections in one other place, so I 
> really don't buy that one :-)

we tried to avoid casting where it was possible with reasonable effort. e.g. 
introducing a separate interface for a type safe QName collection seems overkill.

> Speaking of which, is there a particular reason why 
> QNodeTypeDefinition.getDependencies returns a Collection, not a Set?

because we didn't see a need for a Set. a collection is IMO sufficient. what is 
the benefit of a Set over a Collection for a client?


View raw message