You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@jspwiki.apache.org by Harry Metske <ha...@gmail.com> on 2009/02/25 21:18:58 UTC
WikiEngine+ returning raw type Collections
Hi,
the WikiEngine (and other classes) currently have methods returning raw type
Collections, causing compile warnings.
Any objections if I change those to strong typed ones (mostly
Collection<String> ) ?
regards,
Harry
Re: WikiEngine+ returning raw type Collections
Posted by Janne Jalkanen <ja...@ecyrd.com>.
I just don't see the point to do the work twice, but if it makes
someone happy... :-)
/Janne
On 25 Feb 2009, at 23:25, Andrew Jaquith wrote:
> I think if Harry is offering to simply change method signatures that
> return raw Collection types into concrete ones, that would be just
> dandy. So +1 for that.
>
> I also agree that when we make WikiEngine an interface (in whatever
> package we eventually select), we take only the worthiest of worthy
> methods when we do that. So +1 for that, too.
>
> The two aren't mutually exclusive: in the short term, if Harry is
> willing to do the Collection method signatures, I certainly won't
> discourage him. :)
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Janne Jalkanen
> <ja...@ecyrd.com> wrote:
>>
>> Kinda. We should review each method whether it a) should be there
>> in 3.0,
>> and b) whether it makes sense to return something else than a
>> Collection.
>>
>> My preferred way would be to make WikiEngine an interface, and only
>> take
>> those methods that we feel to be "worthy" into it.
>>
>> /Janne
>>
>> On 25 Feb 2009, at 22:18, Harry Metske wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the WikiEngine (and other classes) currently have methods
>>> returning raw
>>> type
>>> Collections, causing compile warnings.
>>> Any objections if I change those to strong typed ones (mostly
>>> Collection<String> ) ?
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> Harry
>>
>>
Re: WikiEngine+ returning raw type Collections
Posted by Andrew Jaquith <an...@gmail.com>.
I think if Harry is offering to simply change method signatures that
return raw Collection types into concrete ones, that would be just
dandy. So +1 for that.
I also agree that when we make WikiEngine an interface (in whatever
package we eventually select), we take only the worthiest of worthy
methods when we do that. So +1 for that, too.
The two aren't mutually exclusive: in the short term, if Harry is
willing to do the Collection method signatures, I certainly won't
discourage him. :)
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Janne Jalkanen
<ja...@ecyrd.com> wrote:
>
> Kinda. We should review each method whether it a) should be there in 3.0,
> and b) whether it makes sense to return something else than a Collection.
>
> My preferred way would be to make WikiEngine an interface, and only take
> those methods that we feel to be "worthy" into it.
>
> /Janne
>
> On 25 Feb 2009, at 22:18, Harry Metske wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> the WikiEngine (and other classes) currently have methods returning raw
>> type
>> Collections, causing compile warnings.
>> Any objections if I change those to strong typed ones (mostly
>> Collection<String> ) ?
>>
>> regards,
>> Harry
>
>
Re: WikiEngine+ returning raw type Collections
Posted by Janne Jalkanen <ja...@ecyrd.com>.
Kinda. We should review each method whether it a) should be there in
3.0, and b) whether it makes sense to return something else than a
Collection.
My preferred way would be to make WikiEngine an interface, and only
take those methods that we feel to be "worthy" into it.
/Janne
On 25 Feb 2009, at 22:18, Harry Metske wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the WikiEngine (and other classes) currently have methods returning
> raw type
> Collections, causing compile warnings.
> Any objections if I change those to strong typed ones (mostly
> Collection<String> ) ?
>
> regards,
> Harry