Re: locations of DST information
Re: locations of DST information
- Subject: Re: locations of DST information
- From: "Mr. Pierre Frisch" <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:38:44 -0800
Actually this is my argument to dump NSTimestampFormatter, it is an
implementation and it is quite a bad one at that. For once
SimpleDateFormat is a much better, format definition is clearer and
more flexible, localized version works. So much so that if I am not
mistaken the examples in Practical WebObjects use the Simple Date
Format syntax.
I understand everyone concern about existing code and I will take this
into account, but that does not mean we will resurrect deprecated code.
Pierre
--
Pierre Frisch
email@hidden
On Jan 28, 2008, at 15:09, Chuck Hill wrote:
On Jan 28, 2008, at 1:41 PM, Guido Neitzer wrote:
On 28.01.2008, at 14:00, email@hidden wrote:
I mean, c'mon. Why don't you just deprecate mutable and immutable
Arrays, dicts, etc. Java sort of has those data structures too.
Why duplicate the code? .... see what I mean? Where do you draw
the line? When are we supposed to remember to use the NeXTSTEP
class and when to use some Java or lang du jour class?
WO, as a framework, is what matters. The language it runs on is
just a vessel.
That is actually one of the best comments in this discussion.
Whether I agree or not to the dateformat discussion in one or the
other way, it seems a little bit to me as if WO is loosing the
focus to be a very nice to use and very intelligently build
framework in favour of adding more and more Java specific oddities.
Yeah, I am kind of ashamed that I did not think of this. :-)
Losing an extensible NSString for String was perhaps unavoidable as
Sun made String final, but this is entirely avoidable.
NSTimestampFormatter is an abstraction. SimpleDateFormat is _an_
implementation.
Most of the Java libraries are just a big, ugly mess of classes,
one not compatible with the other and most of them not intuitive to
use.
That is about the nicest description of them that I have heard. I
am not usually that generous.
We really shouldn't go that route! And, as Apple doesn't really
care about other platforms, why forcing stuff into WO, that is
conceptually incompatible with the existing WO classes AND with the
ideas existent in Cocoa.
cug, just my private opinion as a Cocoa lover and WO developer
I think the abstraction argument is a very strong one. Having
NSArray implement the Java interfaces is the right way to do this
kind of thing. It allows interoperation with 3rd party Java
libraries while keeping the nicer API from NS. Use Java, but keep
the WO abstractions.
Chuck
--
Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their
overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific
problems.
http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden