Matt Benson wrote:
>
> On Aug 9, 2010, at 7:08 AM, James Carman wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 7:32 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Why not split the code into two methods:
>>>
>>> public static <K,V> Map<K, V> toMap(Map.Entry<K,V>[] array)
>>> and
>>> public static <K,V> Map<K, V> toMap(Class<K> keyType, Class<V>
>>> valueType, Object[][] array)
>>>
>>> Both methods can be made type-safe.
>>>
>>
>> Well, we did just bump the version number, so we are free to do
>> something like that I guess. Anyone else have any thoughts on the
>> subject (are you even paying attention anymore)?
>>
>
> In the spirit of the Map.Entry variant of the method, I would suggest
> eating our own lang3 dog food and providing:
>
> public static <K, V> Map<K, V> toMap(Pair<K, V>... entries)
>
> as well. Pair.of("foo", "bar") is certainly a terser option than creating
> an anonymous implementation of Map.Entry.
+1
I also thought about splitting the API, but lack of an idea I was quiet ;-)
- Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
