underlying storage is HashMap. I just found the following in commons: http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/collections/apidocs/org/apache/commons/collections/bidimap/DualHashBidiMap.html
I wonder if we should use that directly and remove the current ValueMap? --arjuna On 10/25/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I guess both are useful; but what is the underlying storage? If it's a HashMap, then this should be called something like ReverseHashMap. (Or ReversibleHashMap?) -- Adam On 10/24/06, Arjuna Wijeyekoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > I'd like to make > org.apache.myfaces.trinidad.component.ValueMap > a public utility class. > > This class maintains a mapping from key to value, and also from value to > key. It is useful to create > ClientRowKeyManager implementations (See > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ADFFACES-210). > > I'd like to call it > org.apache.myfaces.trinidad.util.ReverseMap > > And I will cleanup the api so that the Map interface is fully implemented > (along with the remove operations). > > What do you think about making this class public? > ?????? > > > > > If we do make this public, which of the following apis is better? > ReverseMap<K,V> map; > V value; > K key = map.getKey(value); // option 1 > or > Map<V,K> valuemap = map.getReverseMap(); // option 2 > K Key = valuemap.get(value); > ??? > > or should we have both? > > --arjuna > >
