> > Though that does raise the question: if you wrap a list that has > > preexisting elements that are invalid, how should that be > > handled (if > > at all)? > > I throw an IllegalArgumentException in the constructor. I > wanted to be able to rely on the object.
Sounds reasonable to me. -- Tim Moore / Blackboard Inc. / Software Engineer 1899 L Street, NW / 5th Floor / Washington, DC 20036 Phone 202-463-4860 ext. 258 / Fax 202-463-4863 > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Colebourne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 4:51 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Collections][SUBMIT] TypedList > > > From: Tim Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Well if you think of this as a list proxy with no backing > store of its > > own, then IMO it makes sense to think of the parameter as the > > collection to delegate to instead of to copy items out of. I feel > > like this is still in keeping with the spirit of the Collection > > javadoc, which didn't really consider collection proxies. > > > If you really want to copy the items from another Collection, you > > would pass it to the constructor of the list that you're wrapping. > > Yes, overall, perhaps I do agree with this. > > > Though that does raise the question: if you wrap a list that has > > preexisting elements that are invalid, how should that be > handled (if > > at all)? > > I throw an IllegalArgumentException in the constructor. I > wanted to be able to rely on the object. > > Stephen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
