You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Christopher Randall <cr...@tivre.com> on 2002/04/30 19:52:03 UTC
Why do Excalibur collection classes not use JDK Collections framework?
Is there a particular reason the Excalibur collection classes do not implement the standard java.util collection interfaces, or is it just a undersight?
It would seem that you would gain some real flexibility by having these classes fit the Collection API.
Chris
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Why do Excalibur collection classes not use JDK Collections framework?
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Christopher Randall wrote:
> Is there a particular reason the Excalibur collection classes do not implement the standard java.util collection interfaces, or is it just a undersight?
>
> It would seem that you would gain some real flexibility by having these classes fit the Collection API.
>
> Chris
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
Can you give an example of what you mean?
The Buffer classes can be optimized because they *don't* use the List
or Collection interface. They have the FIFO buffer working nicely.
THat has a defined reason.
The BucketMap does implement the Map interface.
Which ones are you wanting to know about?
--
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>