I think we've kept the design as YAGNI as possible... :-) Gary
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 3:25 PM, nitin mahendru <nitin.mahendr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah that also is OK. I though there is a reason to keep the CSVRecord > without setters. But maybe not! > > Nitin > > > > > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:22 PM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi All: > > > > Should we consider adding put(int,Object) and put(String, Object) to the > > current CSVRecord class? > > > > Gary > > > > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:54 PM, nitin mahendru < > > nitin.mahendr...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > > > I recently pushed a change(pull request 20) to get the line ending from > > the > > > parser. > > > > > > Now I want to push another change which I feel will also be useful for > > the > > > community. I want to add a CSVRecordMutable class which had a > constructor > > > which accepts a CSVRecord object. So when we have a CSVRecordMutable > > object > > > from it then we can edit individual columns using it. > > > > > > I would be using this to write back my edited CSV file. My use case is > to > > > read a csv, mangle some columns, write back a new csv. > > > > > > I could have directly raised a pull request but I just wanted to float > > the > > > idea before and see the reaction. > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Nitin > > > > > >
