On Saturday, May 4, 2002, at 04:35  AM, Sam Joseph wrote:

> Yes, but I was wondering what the advantage of these alternative to 
> Vector actually was.  I mean I've heard people talk about Vectors 
> thread-safety mechanisms not being required.

One very nice feature of that change is that List is an
interface.  That means we are not locked into the specific
implementation of Vector for the rest of time.  I think
the change is worth it for that alone.

There's also a bit of marketing value:  the Collections
API is widely regarded as one of the best changes that was
added in Java 1.2.  This change enables Torque users to
take advantage of that API.


> Anyway, I'm just saying that any code built on torque will require a 
> lot of changes, but then again perhaps not so many of us have been 
> building on top of torque yet.  I've built about three things that are 
> all going to require rewrites (sorted one of them already), and I was 
> interested to know what sort of advantage using List was going to give 
> me over Vector, when both of them seem to support the same 
> functionality.

I'm sorry to hear your existing apps were broken by the
change.  Please keep in mind that Torque has not been
released yet.  Our deprecation rules apply to official
releases.  It is better in the long run that this
change happen now, before a release so that we don't
find ourselves stuck with only Vectors through the long
deprecation process.  It is clear that you would have
appreciated the deprecation process, but I'm afraid
you've found yourself on the bleeding edge in this
case.

-Eric


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

Reply via email to