I am not historically a champion of readability for
its own sake ;) , but in this case I am of the general
impression (without having thoroughly perused the
proposed change) that it should be possible to
eliminate the duplication without resorting to
reflection. To rephrase, if reflection were (is) the
only way to remove the duplication, I would be +1. I
am not sure it has been demonstrated that this is the
case, so pending clarification here I would categorize
my stance as -0.
-Matt
The basic problem is that the two methods do identical work (up to a
point), except that the fields on which they operate are different.
Of course I could pass in the vectors as parameters instead of doing
a reflective lookup (to be honest it's only just occurred to me that
this would resolve the issue).
I'm interested in this mainly as an academic exercise, because I see
using reflection as the only dynamic behaviour that Java offers and
it allows for some 'tricks' (for want of a better phrase) to write
less code. I'm also interested in the sort of reception that this
kind of code gets - most people who I've worked with (Java
programmers) hate it, but some people (Perl programmers) think it's a
nice solution to a problem.
I'll post a different solution when I get to work, based on a
parameterised helper method.
Thanks for the feedback
Kev
--
"All governments are in equal measure good and evil. The best ideal
is anarchy." - Leo Tolstoy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
