You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com> on 2004/06/03 16:37:12 UTC
[lang] MutableXxx Was: [Jakarta Commons Wiki] New: MutableNumbers
Thanks Matt,
1 lang.mutable gets my vote.
2 MutableXxx gets my vote as a naming scheme.
3 I'm in favour of MutableXxx having instance links to XxxUtils to make
them more powerful [and delegating calls to all Xxx methods]. This does
make it a large lump of work though.
4 Do we need MutableInteger, MutableFloat etc, or can we just normalize on
the main ones?
MutableLong [which would handle ints, shorts]
MutableString
MutableDouble [which would handle float]
MutableByte [assuming it is different to MutableLong]
MutableCharacter
MutableBoolean
Hen
On Thu, 3 Jun 2004 commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org wrote:
> Date: 2004-06-03T07:08:24
> Editor: 66.167.119.196 <>
> Wiki: Jakarta Commons Wiki
> Page: MutableNumbers
> URL: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-commons/MutableNumbers
>
> adding info on mutable numbers
>
> New Page:
>
> There have been a few threads about mutable numbers and I'll try to summarize the ideas.
>
> '''1) What package/project should these classes go in?'''
>
> My initial thought was lang.math, but if we create MutableByte, MutableString, or others
> non-numeric types, this isn't a good fit. lang.mutable may be a better fit.
>
>
> '''2) What type of naming scheme should we use?'''
>
> MutableInteger vs. MInteger vs. IntegerHolder vs. ?
>
>
> '''3) Comparision between my (matth) initial implementation vs. Geronimos'''
>
> I can't find the Mutable classes in Geronimo anymore. Perhaps they were removed?
>
> One of the primary differences I noted was that the Geromino classes containeed additional
> methods such add add(int), subtract(int), and things like that. I find this similar to
> Henri's suggestion that MutableString contain StringUtils-like methods (split(), capitalize(), etc).
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [lang] MutableXxx Was: [Jakarta Commons Wiki] New: MutableNumbers
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
Sounds like a good plan to me. No one has brought up a -ve view.
Hen
On Fri, 4 Jun 2004, matthew.hawthorne wrote:
> So, should I commit what I have into lang.mutable, and we can go from
> there?
> I have all of the Number types complete, with some decent tests.
>
> This way, anyone who's interested can take a look and make improvements.
>
>
>
>
> Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> > From: "Henri Yandell" <ba...@generationjava.com>
> >
> >>1 lang.mutable gets my vote.
> >
> > +1
> >
> >
> >>2 MutableXxx gets my vote as a naming scheme.
> >
> > +1
> >
> >
> >>3 I'm in favour of MutableXxx having instance links to XxxUtils to make
> >>them more powerful [and delegating calls to all Xxx methods]. This does
> >>make it a large lump of work though.
> >
> > -0 for v2.1, +0 after
> >
> >
> >>4 Do we need MutableInteger, MutableFloat etc, or can we just normalize on
> >>the main ones?
> >
> > I think we need them all, as casting the get() is a pain otherwise.
> >
> > Stephen
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [lang] MutableXxx Was: [Jakarta Commons Wiki] New: MutableNumbers
Posted by "matthew.hawthorne" <ma...@apache.org>.
So, should I commit what I have into lang.mutable, and we can go from
there?
I have all of the Number types complete, with some decent tests.
This way, anyone who's interested can take a look and make improvements.
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> From: "Henri Yandell" <ba...@generationjava.com>
>
>>1 lang.mutable gets my vote.
>
> +1
>
>
>>2 MutableXxx gets my vote as a naming scheme.
>
> +1
>
>
>>3 I'm in favour of MutableXxx having instance links to XxxUtils to make
>>them more powerful [and delegating calls to all Xxx methods]. This does
>>make it a large lump of work though.
>
> -0 for v2.1, +0 after
>
>
>>4 Do we need MutableInteger, MutableFloat etc, or can we just normalize on
>>the main ones?
>
> I think we need them all, as casting the get() is a pain otherwise.
>
> Stephen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [lang] MutableXxx Was: [Jakarta Commons Wiki] New: MutableNumbers
Posted by Stephen Colebourne <sc...@btopenworld.com>.
From: "Henri Yandell" <ba...@generationjava.com>
> 1 lang.mutable gets my vote.
+1
> 2 MutableXxx gets my vote as a naming scheme.
+1
> 3 I'm in favour of MutableXxx having instance links to XxxUtils to make
> them more powerful [and delegating calls to all Xxx methods]. This does
> make it a large lump of work though.
-0 for v2.1, +0 after
> 4 Do we need MutableInteger, MutableFloat etc, or can we just normalize on
> the main ones?
I think we need them all, as casting the get() is a pain otherwise.
Stephen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org