Are we going to keep the 2,3,4-arg versions? We have to have one that
accepts Object anyway, so I guess it does keep the API a bit cleaner
to not clutter it with a Map, Collection, etc. version. I really
don't like instanceof in code, though. It just screams bad design.
Usually it means that
What are the pros and cons?
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Paul Benedict pbened...@apache.org wrote:
If we want to implement LANG-508 (Validate: add message parameter
construction via elllipsis notation to speed up processing), I am
really concerned with the many overloaded versions of
I'm unconvinced by this change overall. It feels like a bit of a
diversion from the original purpose of the class. I think it
complicates greatly what should be a really simple, no-brainer, class.
I could live with a one arg addition, but want to avoid varargs and primitives:
public static T T[]
I just wrote a class that included...
public static T T someMethod(T val)
{
System.out.println(Single value method!);
return val;
}
public static T T[] someMethod(T... values)
{
System.out.println(Multi-value method.);
return values;
}
The purpose of var-args, at least from my vantage, is to produce
detail messages that are used by java.lang.String.format.
Paul
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 7:11 AM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
I just wrote a class that included...
public static T T someMethod(T val)
{
I understand that. My point is that if you can create two, overloaded
methods (which I've shown you can do), one with one single argument
and one with var-args, then you can avoid the Object[] instantiation
in the single-argument case.
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Paul Benedict
James,
Yes. I want to also eliminate the static types of all the overloaded
methods. We don't need a version for maps, one for char sets, one for
objects, one for collections, etc. We can do all those checks dynamically.
This was my point of my original email. What are your thoughts on it?
I think we should reduce the overloading and just accept Object. From
the runtime type, we can determine how to do further checks. Then, we
can nicely implement 1 args, 2, args, ... and finally var-args overloads.
Paul
On 11/26/2009 10:49 PM, James Carman wrote:
So, what you're concerned
If we want to implement LANG-508 (Validate: add message parameter
construction via elllipsis notation to speed up processing), I am
really concerned with the many overloaded versions of #validIndex()
and #notEmpty() that solely differ by static argument type:
Collection, Object, Object[],
