robert burrell donkin wrote:
happier developing at joda or would you prefer see that code as the
basis for a commons primitives 2?
It could be commons primitives 2, but as the API would be rather
different it would seem difficult to explain to our users. Having the
separate codebase would thus seem to make sense.
had it in mind to introduce a lighter IntMap interface and to provide an
adapter to map. that's the way the rest of commons primitives works. but
i'm pretty agnostic: equally happy to extend Map.
With the design you are thinking of, commons seems best.
perhaps it might be possible to create code that could easily be added
to both repositories. worth looking into?
The joda code uses code-generation to create all the 8 types of
primitives from velocity templates. I always felt this was a better way
to manage code such as primitives. As such though, the codebases have
very little in common, so I suspect trying to write one codebase would
be difficult.
Stephen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
