There's really not much difference between using: Map results = new HashMap(map);
and: Map results = new HashMap(); results.putAll(map); Maybe I'm missing the point you're trying to make, but I don't see how that would solve the problem. Quoting Ron Grabowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:42:58 -0400 > > From: Kris Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: Struts Users Mailing List > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: html:link and map of request parameters > > > > I believe the base requirement for Struts 1.1 is JDK > > 1.2 or later. Since > > LinkedHashMap was introduced in JDK 1.4, it really > > can't be used in the Struts > > codebase. I suppose > > org.apache.commons.collections.SequencedHashMap > > could be > > used in its place. However, the problem is really > > more general than that. What > > if someone was using a SortedMap? Or a WeakHashMap? > > Or SomeOtherSpecialMap? The > > process of doing: > > > > results = new HashMap(map); > > > > blows away any special functionality that might > > impact how the original map > > makes entries available. I'm not exactly sure why > > the entries are copied out of > > the original map, but it may have something to do > > with trying to avoid raising > > a ConcurrentModificationException. > > The java.util.Map interface has a putAll(Map m) > method. If that were called instead of new Hashmap(): > > results.putAll(map); > > results would still get populated. SortedMap, > WeakHashMap, SomeOtherSpecialMap, etc. all implement > the Map interface so those should continue to work. > > The documentation calls for a java.util.Map object, > why not call a java.util.Map method? > > - Ron -- Kris Schneider <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> D.O.Tech <http://www.dotech.com/> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
