I had forgotten this - I agree something like pint, pboolean etc is cumbersome and counter-intuitive and would negate a significant reason for my suggestion so prob not worth it.
-----Original Message----- From: Brent Worden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 October 2003 00:55 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: RE: [primitives] Package layout strategy To my knowledge, the type based packaging as presented is not possible. boolean, byte, short, et al are Java keywords and can not be used as parts of a package name. So, if a type based approach is to be employed, convoluted names for primitive types would need to be used instead of their conventional names. With that, I would say, the collection based approach is clearly the better alternative. ************************************************************************** The information transmitted herewith is sensitive information intended only for use by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from your computer. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
