I think from earlier posts the plan is to deprecate the methods in lang, but only after math reaches a 1.0 release.
Eric Pugh -----Original Message----- From: Gary Gregory [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2003 7:00 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: FW: [lang] .lang.math (WAS: Words - for 2.0) Resending. Since we are on the topic of things in the wrong place... I'll raise another "arg" and ask: Why have an o.a.c.lang.math when we have a o.a.c.math in the works? If o.a.c.lang.math is really useful, why not move it to o.a.c.math? If you used the now deprecated range classes, you /should/ change your code to .lang.math. Hmm, maybe this is something we could do for 2.1/3.0. Gary > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 10:05 > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [lang] Words - for 2.0 > > So, not too aarggh then, just pull WordWrapUtils ;-)) > > (The other stuff this morning was all javadoc except for ToStringStyle > where > a method rename took place with deprecation) > > Stephen > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Henri Yandell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 5:56 PM > Subject: Re: [lang] Words - for 2.0 > > > > > > > > On Sat, 16 Aug 2003, Stephen Colebourne wrote: > > > > > In examining the release, I found I need to annoy everyone again. > > > > *aarggh* :) > > > > > WordWrapUtils is broken. > > > > No no no. It's a feature. > > > > > The algorithm relies on a newLineChars parameter that is used for two > > > purposes. > > > 1) Splitting the input string > > > 2) Adding newlines to the output string > > > > > > This is a new class, so it should either be pulled (preferred) or > fixed > (not > > > preferred, as there are various issues) > > > > +1 to pulled out for consideration for 2.1/other. > > > > > Related issue - WordWrapUtils is too specific a name. > > > I propose: > > > 1) changing it to WordUtils (or StringWordUtils) > > > > +1 on WordUtils. More generic. > > > > > 2) moving capitalizeAllWords to WordUtils > > > 3) moving uncapitalizeAllWords to WordUtils > > > 4) moving swapCase to WordUtils > > > > +1 for 2.1/3.0. > > > > > This would help reduce the size of StringUtils, and provide much > better > > > functional grouping. There is lots we can do with words. (Of course > you > > > could argue for a separate [text] project, but I doubt there is that > much.) > > > > -1 to [text] taking the above until [text] is ready for 1.0. I am +1 for > a > > [text], in the same way I'm +1 for [math], but I don't want us to > > deprecate our methods until [math] releases at 1.0 with our methods > > included. > > > > > I would like to do this for 2.0, as otherwise users of > capitaliseAllWords > > > will have to change twice. However we could say that is a small group > of > > > people and postpone the change to 2.1. > > > > > > Opinions? > > > > There are going to be changes on the new features before 2.1/3.0, and > > it's going to be a year probably until we have a 3.0 out [though 2.0.1 > or > > 2.1 might be quicker]. I may be being lazy, but I don't think that going > > with WordUtils right now would affect too many people and we don't > really > > have enough knowledge right now to get it right for 2.0. > > > > Hen > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
