On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 00:32, Greg Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > Honestly, we've been working with this API as-is for quite a while, and I've > never found it to be a significant inconvenience. In fact, I rather like the > elegance of code like the following: > > for (int i = 0, n = mySequence.getLength(); i < n; i++) { > ... > } >
I guess I'm going to have to disagree with you there - I find that very clunky :-) But my point is that with the introduction of Iterable into the java libraries, programmer __expect__ to be able to iterate over list-like things. And the use of Sequence in the wtk API violates that assumption (ref. Principle of Least Surprise) I don't see that adding a new type IterableSequence and making it the default in the wtk API would add any extra overhead - you could keep doing your style for-loops, and I could have mine :-) Regards, Noel Grandin
