Thank you for discussion of my topic.
I know that I cannot use the children for living. There are many complicate
management of the ObjectNode. Just browsing is ok.

Regards,
Somchai

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nevermann, Dr., Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Slide Developers Mailing List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 8:50 PM
Subject: RE: Vector of children in ObjectNode


> Chris, long time no see!
> Thanks for your helpful comments.
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Christopher Lenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 13:37
> > To: Slide Developers Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: Vector of children in ObjectNode
> >
> >
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > Please note that ObjectNode#getChildren() has been deprecated
> > in favor of
> > ObjectNode#enumerateChildren(). Changing the signature is effectively
> > removing a method that was deprecated anyway, and adding a
> > new method. So
> > effectively, the change would not really break
> > backwards-compatibility.
> > However, when this change is made, the getChildren() method
> > needs to be
> > "undeprecated", and maybe the enumerateChildren() method should be
> > deprecated instead.
> >
> > With regards to the "liveliness" of the list: it should not
> > be live IMHO.
> > But instead of expensively cloning the vector, why not use the Java 2
> > Collections API to make the list immutable:
> >
> >    public List getChildren() {
> >        return Collections.unmodifiableList(this.children);
> >    }
> >
> > [Of course, a migration to Java 2 collections would be nice to do
> > consequently throughout the Slide kernel, while preserving
> > backwards-compatibility.]
> >
> > Anyway, just a comment from one of the no-longer-active committers :-P
> >
> > -chris
> >
> > Nevermann, Dr., Peter wrote:
> > > Somchai,
> > >
> > > do you need the Vector returned by getChildren to be
> > "live", i.e. modifying
> > > the Vector modifies the state of the ObjectNode? I suppose
> > that this is not
> > > the case and would return a clone of the Vector in the getChildren()
> > > implementation.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > >
> > >>-----Original Message-----
> > >>From: SomchaiDion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 21:07
> > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>Subject: Vector of children in ObjectNode
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Dear sir,
> > >>    I just changed to develop application with Slide 1.0.16
> > >>to 2.0 (from
> > >>cvs). I found that there are many changes. However, for my
> > first times
> > >>sending email to developer mailing list, I would like to
> > ask about the
> > >>ObjectNode class. If this topic should be sent to user
> > >>mailing list, please
> > >>execute me.
> > >>    I tried to map Slide structure to a TreeNode for showing
> > >>on JTree. But,
> > >>there are 2 methods for get enumeration of children,
> > getChildren() and
> > >>enumerateChildren(). I had a problem that the JTree/TreeModel
> > >>index a child
> > >>node by number. That do not sure the order of children in
> > >>enumeration will
> > >>be the same all times. The old way that I did is to put all
> > >>children in
> > >>enumeration into Vector and sort. It is not effective. In the
> > >>Slide 1.0.16,
> > >>I can obtain the ObjectNode.children by writing a utility
> > >>class in the same
> > >>package because it has a default modifier. So sad, in version
> > >>2.0, it is a
> > >>private.
> > >>    Because of there are 2 methods doing the same. Is it
> > >>possible to change
> > >>the getChildren() to return Vector?
> > >>
> > >>Thank you
> > >>Somchai



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to