Are people really using these classes in an MT way? These seem like the kind of classes you do not share between threads. My op only though.
Gary On Jan 29, 2011, at 12:27, "Simone Tripodi" <simonetrip...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi all guys!!! :) > I'd suggest to apply Jacopo's suggestion, making strategies' fields as > final would help classes becoming thread-safe; to fix the issue of > construction described by Stephen, it would be useful adding builder > classes (optionally implemented as static inner classes). > WDYT? HTH, that's just my opinion, > Simo > > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ > http://www.99soft.org/ > > > > On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Jacopo Cappellato > <jacopo.cappell...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Thank you Stephen, >> >> I understand this; alternatively we could implement a factory method that >> clones DEFAULT_STRATEGY, EXCEL_STRATEGY, TDF_STRATEGY; but I will definitely >> postpone any decision, it is not a big deal for me and we can wait for >> additional feedback. >> >> Jacopo >> >> On Jan 29, 2011, at 1:16 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote: >> >>> Traditionally, many commons projects has taken no position on the >>> correct way to instantiate objects, whether via constructor or bean >>> methods. This was to allow construction from tools such as Velocity. >>> It is also still easier to construct using Spring via bean methods >>> rather than the constructor. >>> >>> These days, immutability and concurrency are more important, so this >>> change may be applicable, buts its good to understand the history and >>> wide use cases of classes like these. >>> >>> Stephen >>> >>> >>> On 29 January 2011 12:04, Jacopo Cappellato <jacopo.cappell...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> in my opinion all the setter methods should be removed from the >>>> CSVStrategy class: in this way the fields will only be set using the >>>> constructors and they will become readonly. >>>> The main issue I see with the current implementation is that a calling >>>> method can modify the values of the fields of the following static objects >>>> declared in CSVStrategy (changing the default behavior for all subsequent >>>> code that uses for example CSVStrategy.DEFAULT_STRATEGY): >>>> >>>> public static CSVStrategy DEFAULT_STRATEGY = new CSVStrategy(',', '"', >>>> COMMENTS_DISABLED, ESCAPE_DISABLED, true, >>>> true, >>>> false, true); >>>> public static CSVStrategy EXCEL_STRATEGY = new CSVStrategy(',', '"', >>>> COMMENTS_DISABLED, ESCAPE_DISABLED, false, >>>> false, >>>> false, false); >>>> public static CSVStrategy TDF_STRATEGY = new CSVStrategy('\t', '"', >>>> COMMENTS_DISABLED, ESCAPE_DISABLED, true, >>>> true, >>>> false, true); >>>> >>>> What do you think? >>>> >>>> Jacopo >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> 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 >>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
