river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org>
Subject Re: Space/outrigger suggestions (remote iterator vs. collection)
Date Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:16:21 GMT
James Grahn wrote:
> It (finally) occurred to me that we can have our cake and eat it too in 
> this case.
> 
> We can have the sweet deliciousness of API symmetry and retain the 
> implementation advantages of remote iterator & collection by having both 
> take-multiple and contents return:
> Iterable.
> 
> This would introduce more flexibility in the spec, allowing more design 
> decisions to be made by those implementing, while presenting a uniform 
> external return type to the users.   (A relatively standard one at that.)
> 
> When I was looking at the remote iterator earlier, I was thinking it 
> would probably be best to have it implement Iterator and probably 
> Iterable anyway.
> 
> The only potential sour note is that Iterable is a 1.5 interface.   So 
> that's come up again.

We could define our own Iterable, in one of our packages, with the same 
definition as java.util.Iterable.

However, it would not have the nice for-loop syntax, and we could spend 
a lot of time building up workarounds for not being 1.5.

Patricia

Mime
View raw message