My thinking was more that CSVParser itself implements Iterator.
Matt
On Aug 13, 2013 2:59 AM, "Benedikt Ritter" <brit...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
>
> 2013/8/12 Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com>
>
> > As someone with no prior involvement with this component, and at risk of
> > being hit by the digital tomatoes of the group, this seems to indicate to
> > me that once a parser definition has been joined to a source of input,
> the
> > resulting object *is* the record iterator. If there's no way to twist
> that
> > into a comfortable API, I would tend to agree with Benedikt: calling
> > #iterator() a second time should do something like triggering an
> > IllegalStateException().
> >
>
> No tomatoes, don't worry ;-) feedback is always welcome.
>
> I'm not sure I understand what you're suggesting. Are you thinking of
> something like:
>
> Iterator<CSVRecord> itr = CSVParser.parse(myCsvFile);
>
> CSVParser has some features that go beyond the capabilities of the
> Iterator() interface. For example one can ask the parser for the current
> line number in your input and the current record number (which may not be
> the same for multi line records).
> How about extending the Iterator interface?
>
> CSVIterator itr = CSVParser.parse(myCsvFile);
>
> and CSVIterator would look like:
>
> public interface CSVIterator extends Iterator<CSVRecord> {
> // call the cool CSVParser stuff goes here
> }
>
> But this wouldn't prevent more than one iterator over the same source...
>
> Benedikt
>
>
> >
> > $0.02,
> > Matt
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I've added a new test to CSVParser test case that shows what happens
> if
> > > > CSVParser.iterator() is called twice [1].
> > > >
> > > > This looks pretty strange to me. One iterator can eat up records of
> the
> > > > other.
> > > > Would it be better to throw an exception if iterator() is called more
> > > than
> > > > once?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yeah, there is something odd about the current impl. Wouldn't it be
> > obvious
> > > what can be done if there is an iterator ivar and the accessor just
> > returns
> > > it? It does not even have to be lazy initialized.
> > >
> > > Gary
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Benedikt
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://svn.apache.org/r1513228
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > http://people.apache.org/~britter/
> > > > http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
> > > > http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
> > > > http://github.com/britter
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> > > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<
> > > http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> > > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> > > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> > > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> > > Home: http://garygregory.com/
> > > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://people.apache.org/~britter/
> http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
> http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
> http://github.com/britter
>
