Thanks for posting. On the IO Active comment - it is something we need to figure out how to do better. I've a set of components I rotate between for example:
IO, Lang, CLI, Codec, Collections amongst others. I know there are others who do the same kind of thing. But then we do have components that are less less likely to see a release/update. Anyway - feel free to open a JIRA up for IO. I suspect that once Lang 3.0 is out, I'll be interested in an IO 2.0 unless someone gets there before me. Hen On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Michael Wooten <mwooten....@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey All, > > I know this is from a long time ago, but I finally created JIRA entries ( > LANG-579 <http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LANG-579> and > LANG-580<http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LANG-580>) > for these features. I changed the inRange() methods to be inclusiveBetween() > and exclusiveBetween() to handle the issue of inclusiveness. I removed the > suggestions for the Validate methods related to IO. I will consider > submitting a proposal for an IoValidate class to the IO project, but IO > doesn't seem to be active at all. > > Feel free to post comments on my suggestions. > > Thanks. > > -Michael > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 7:27 AM, James Carman > <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 8:23 AM, Michael Wooten<mwooten....@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > I was assuming I would use the fact that compareTo() returns 0 for the >> case >> > of equality. My original assumption was the test would be as simple as >> > ((value.compareTo(start) >= 0) && (value.compareTo(end) <= 0)). However, >> as >> > the documentation for Comparable states, compareTo()'s 0 return may not >> be >> > equivalent to equals(), so feel free to debate how this would be >> > implemented. It may just be the case that the behavior be documented in >> the >> > API. >> > >> > Additional thoughts? >> >> I meant how are you going to allow for less than vs. less than or >> equal to on the boundaries of your range with this API? >> >> And, compareTo() == 0 only means that objects are equivalent with >> respect to the comparison being performed. It doesn't necessarily >> mean they're the same object, as you pointed out (two distinct Person >> objects with the same last name would show a comparison value of 0 if >> comparing by last name only). >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
