DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38083>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38083 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-01-05 23:31 ------- (In reply to comment #7) > I think it's better if you declare a return type of LineIterator. This way, no > casts are necessary. I'm neutral on that, but if thats whats required I'm happy to attach a new version on that basis. Probably would be better if its an IOIterator, rather than LineIterator though? I wasn't sure whether the having IOIterator that extends Iterator to add a close() method or a separate interface with just the close() was desired. Guess if the consensus is with you then better to extend Iterator, otherwise it would have to return the implementation rather than the type. > Iterator i = FileUtils.lineIterator( blah ); > Those who do will say > LineIterator i = FileUtils.lineIterator( blah ); IOIterator i = FileUtils.lineIterator( blah ); > Regards, > James The other thing I wondered was maybe its better to have a new RuntimeException that includes the "cause" (I assume io is JDK 1.3 dependant, and not 1.4) rather than trapping IOException and re-throwing IllegalStateException with just the message. Niall -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
