On 18 May 2011 16:37, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > The bigger issue in my mind is why a Range does not extend Pair. It's pretty > clear (to me at least) that a range is a pair of values.
Please start a new thread for that issue. AFAICT that would not help improve the performance of the Escaper classes and the utility classes that call them. > Because the Pair is in our tuple package, it means that it should follow > tuple logic and be an ordered list of elements, in this case two elements. > > This means that the methods that Range has that are not in Pair could be > moved there. > > Gary > > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 9:53 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm not happy with the boxing that is often needed to create a Range >> of int or long, e.g. in StringEscapeUtils. >> >> Seems to me that the UnicodeEscaper and NumericEntityEscaper classes >> should require ints rather than a Range, as this would cut down on the >> boxing and unboxing that is currently needed, as well as the extra >> code needed to provide comparisons etc. >> >> Or, there could be a specialised IntRange class using int to provide >> the functionality. >> >> These changes are new to 3.0, so could be fixed now without backward >> compat. problems. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > > > -- > Thank you, > Gary > > http://garygregory.wordpress.com/ > http://garygregory.com/ > http://people.apache.org/~ggregory/ > http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
