Re: Getters without the "get" part
Re: Getters without the "get" part
- Subject: Re: Getters without the "get" part
- From: Lachlan Deck <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 14:21:02 +1100
On 01/04/2009, at 6:29 AM, Mike Schrag wrote:
This already should have happened. Once you get a firm grasp of the
Java Collections API, it's design, intention and power, NSArray and
it's company will make you want to puke. I actually thought that WO
would move in this direction by first making NSArray implement
List, and do all the similar stuff, then depreciate Foundation
collections, and the finally get rid of them. Well, maybe that
still is the intention, but it sure is slow.
The lack of power sucks,
Can you elaborate on the lack of power?
Things I love (not) about standard collections: can't instantiate the
silly things with objects. No nsarray kvc ops...
but the lack of immutable forms of the List/Map/Set interfaces in
Java is a failure IMO.
Indeed.
WO/EOF moving to straight List/Map/Set would suffer from a loss in
clarity as a result. On the flip side, it would gain the performance
and flexibility of the Java collections APIs, which is a win. I'm
definitely conflicted on the correct answer to this conundrum.
As long as KVC options remain I guess I don't mind if they go the way
of the dodo. But I much prefer the clarity of setObjectForKey than put
etc.
with regards,
--
Lachlan Deck
_______________________________________________
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