On 09/10/2010 06:46 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
--- On Fri, 9/10/10, Adam Heath<[email protected]> wrote:
On 09/10/2010 04:46 PM, Adrian Crum
wrote:
I have a feeling that will break a lot of screen
widget/mini-language code.
Removing implements Map, or fixing the implementation?
I've seen code scattered around that checks if the Map is
an instance
of MapStack, and then does a push, falling back on wrapping
the map in
a new MapStack. Such code shouldn't break
Let's cross our fingers.
I understand your viewpoint and I'm not arguing against it. If MapStack
implements Map, then it should follow the Map contract - from a Java
developer's viewpoint.
My concern is for the OFBiz user who is writing a simple method, and they expect their
changes to local variables to be local - not global. The OFBiz user is not aware of - or
concerned with - a "Map contract."
Huh? Changes to map expected to be local, not global? What do you
mean by that? If I call map.remove(key) in a simple method, I expect
that the very next line after that will return false for
map.containsKey(key).
-Adrian
