Henri Yandell wrote:
First thought when looking at the code is that we could simplify things
with a protected Number in MutableNumber, and move the intValue etc
methods up into MutableNumber.
The getValue/ setValue(Object) can go up too, and all that would be left
in the mutable subclass is the primitive override and the constructor.
Pro: Less code in the subclasses.
Con: A protected rather than private variable. More memory is taken up
with the mutable part being an Object and not a primitive.
Just a thought.
I think the pro of simpler code may be bigger than the con of memory loss.
Those involved in hardcore performance tweaking may disagree. For me,
the mutable classes were more about the added functionality than the savings
in memory, so I'm in agreement with you here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
