--- Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: "David Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Just out of curiosity, why are you leaving Hash out of the names? The > > Java idiom seems to be to indicate a collection's implementation in > the > > name. Even the standard WeakHashMap maintains the "Hash" portion of > the > > name. I'm not particularly tied to CaseInsensitiveHashMap but I chose > > that name based on current Java practices. > > Because people have assumed in the past that an XxxHashMap extends > HashMap > (normal Java naming practices). Its really just duplicate info anyway.
java.util.WeakHashMap does not subclass java.util.HashMap but still includes "Hash" in the name. They did that to indicate that it uses a hashtable in its implementation not that it subclasses a particular class. So, I still believe the current Java practice is to indicate the impl. in the collection class name. David > Hence > ReferenceMap, not ReferenceHashMap, LinkedMap not LinkedHashMap. > > Stephen > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
