On 11/06/14 13:56, Claude Warren wrote:
A comment about the Graph interface:
>
>I see no point in GraphAdd and would prefer one interface.
>
>The important difference is mutable/immutable but it is rarely fixed for
>the entire lifetime of a graph in Jena and the collections style immutable
>converters is better (equivalently, read-only views of a graph or dataset).
>
>Only if interfaces actually took "ImmutableGraph" because they needed them
>would it make sense to me but that is a huge change in both code and
>overall architecture.
>
> Andy
>
><claude>
I agree with you.
Note: It should be fairly easy to write an ImmutableGraph wrapper that
throws an exception when any method that updates the graph is called.
Actually, the security classes already do this for cases where the user
does not have access.
Are there really that many places where GraphAdd is explicitly used?
</claude>
According to Eclipse, the only use of the work GraphAdd are as a
superinterface to the Graph interface, the interface defn of GraphAdd
itself and a class GraphAddList.
There no calls to the constructor of GraphAddList.
Might as well deprecate GraphAddList as a sign.
Andy
