Are you wanting to add dates to the resulting collection and have them transformed into Strings? Or, are you just looking for a collection of Strings that you don't need to modify which represent the dates? If it's the latter, you should use the CollectionUtils.collect() method rather than the transformedCollection() method. I too have been burned by that very thing. Just by looking at the name, it would seem that transformedCollection() would return a collection which was the result of applying the transformer to the input collection. Not so! I've learned that the hard way a few times (bad memory).
-----Original Message----- From: Rob Oxspring [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2005 11:42 AM To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: [collections] TransformedCollection Hi, I've just been burnt (and not for the first time) by the fact that the TransformedCollection doesn't transform the objects that are already in the wrapped collection. For example: Collection dates = ... // a collection with Date objects in it Transformer toString = ... // a transformer that calls toString Collection strings = CollectionUtils.transformedCollection(dates,toString); My intuition tells me that strings should be full of String objects and have no Date objects in it but the opposite is true. Is this the intended behaviour or is this a bug? I'm happy to patch the TransformedCollection class but wanted to run it passed people first... Thanks, Rob --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
