On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Ola Berg wrote:
> > On 2002-12-23 at 19:05 Stephen Colebourne wrote: > > > However, I would not be averse to adding mutable versions of the Number > > classes to math. I would want to see the complete set however, > > MutableBigDecimal, MutableBigInteger, MutableInteger, MutableLong, > > MutableDouble, MutableFloat and MutableFraction. They would need to be > > Number subclasses. > > I think the word "mutable" leads wrong. The number in itself isn't > mutable, it is the object that is told to hold a completely different > number. Doesn't this depend on the implementation? Why wouldn't they be implemented as Numbers themselves and not containers? > What about "container" or "holder" to indicate that it is something > that more or less resembles a variable? You can assign different > values to it but use it just as a literal (immutable) in any > calculation, just as a variable. MutableXxx matches the (hidden) Sun API in java.math. Just my tuppence, Hen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
