>> > Could you fit in making Map interface a Collection? It is technically >> > a collection of key-value pairs, and I see no reason why the interface >> > shouldn't reflect it. :) >> >> Yeah. I agree on that, hence my question in the first mail about >> exposing an interface for map entries (that key/value pairs). > > How is that possible, the methods' signatures do not match: > - Collection.add (G item) vs. Map.set (K key, V value) > - Collection.contains (G item) vs. Map.contains (K key) > - Collection.remove (K item) vs. Map.remove (K key)
Why not rename some of the Map methods (contains => contains_key, remove => remove_key) and then map the Collection methods as-is with G == Pair<K,V>? _______________________________________________ Vala-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
