Jukka Zitting wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Marshall Schor<m...@schor.com> wrote: > >> Would it be better to have that form of the signature? >> > > I don't know much about UIMA patterns, but in general something like > that seems a bit questionable to me. Where's the part of the API that > says that the client can expect CASImpl objects from the returned > Iterator? >
True, that's not part of the API. So users won't use that. But the internal code makes use of the xxx_impl forms a lot, and generification with returned things of the form <? extends T> are needed to enable that use, I think. > On a related note, have you considered using Iterables instead of > Iterators? They make the looping constructs much nicer. > I agree; these could be added. Would they be "additions to", not updates of the existing APIs? -Marshall > BR, > > Jukka Zitting > > >
