[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMMONSRDF-7?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15615282#comment-15615282
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on COMMONSRDF-7:
-----------------------------------------

Github user stain commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/incubator-commonsrdf/pull/26#discussion_r85522851
  
    --- Diff: api/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/rdf/api/Quad.java ---
    @@ -17,16 +17,30 @@
      */
     package org.apache.commons.rdf.api;
     
    +import java.util.List;
    +import java.util.Map;
     import java.util.Objects;
     import java.util.Optional;
    +import java.util.Set;
     
     /**
      * A Quad is a statement in a
      * <a href= "http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-dataset"; >RDF-1.1
      * Dataset</a>, as defined by
    - * <a href= "https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-rdf11-datasets-20140225/"; 
>RDF-1.1
    + * <a href= 
"https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-rdf11-datasets-20140225/#quad-semantics"; 
>RDF-1.1
      * Concepts and Abstract Syntax</a>, a W3C Working Group Note published on 
25
      * February 2014.
    + * <p>
    + * A {@link Quad} object in Commons RDF is considered <em>immutable</em>, 
that
    + * is, over it's life time it will have consistent behaviour for its
    + * {@link #equals(Object)} and {@link #hashCode()}, and the instances 
returned
    + * from {@link #getGraphName()}, {@link #getSubject()}, {@link 
#getPredicate()}
    + * and {@link #getObject()} will have consistent {@link 
Object#equals(Object)}
    --- End diff --
    
    I removed the `hashCode` text and rather said that `Triple`, `Quad` and 
`RDFTerm` can be used in hashing collections like `HashSet`.


> Document that RDFTerm, Triple and Quad are immutable
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: COMMONSRDF-7
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMMONSRDF-7
>             Project: Apache Commons RDF
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: api
>            Reporter: Stian Soiland-Reyes (old)
>            Assignee: Stian Soiland-Reyes
>              Labels: discussion, immutable
>             Fix For: 0.3.0
>
>
> From https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/issues/57
> ansell:
> {quote}
> As mentioned in #45, should we add a contract requirement that all RDFTerm 
> instances (and Triple?) be implemented as immutable objects?
> https://github.com/commons-rdf/commons-rdf/issues/45
> {quote}
> stain:
> {quote}
> +1, if we say SHOULD. But only the exposed RDFTerm++ methods need to be 
> immutable - so this should probably go into each of their descriptions. So if 
> I have a getDatabaseThingie() method that can be mutable.
> {quote}
> ansell:
> {quote}
> The value of stating that the objects must be immutable is decreased if it 
> only applies to the results of the API methods. A useful goal would be to 
> ensure that the entire object is immutable to give a guarantee about 
> threadsafety, but that may be too much for all implementations to support.
> Just stating that the results of the visible API methods are immutable 
> doesn't help much. It is also not likely to apply to the methods that return 
> Optional, as to enable serialisation, the actual field may not be an Optional 
> itself in most cases.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to