Github user afs commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jena/pull/106#discussion_r47336271
--- Diff:
jena-arq/src/main/java/org/apache/jena/sparql/core/mem/QuadTableForm.java ---
@@ -124,31 +96,21 @@ public PMapQuadTable get() {
return new PMapQuadTable(name()) {
@Override
- protected Quad quad(final Node s, final Node p,
final Node o, final Node g) {
- return Quad.create(g, s, p, o);
- }
+ public Quad tuple(final Quad q) {
+ return create(q.getSubject(), q.getPredicate(),
q.getObject(), q.getGraph());
--- End diff --
It'll be clear when the white space is standardised but am I right in
seeing:
* Using Quad and putting strange things in the slots which is very
confusing. `getGraph` returns the `getSubject`.
* There seems to be some creating objects just to take them apart again.
The strength of the design is that quads/triples are not stored, instead nodes
are placed in indexes. To reflect that, operations based on g/s/p/o in some
order are clearer to me at least as well as reducing object churn.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
