Hi Paul,
the use of that method is to automatically infer the assigned type,
instead of writing
MyPojo myPojo = (MyPojo) context.get( "myKey" );
the retrieve method allows to
MyPojo myPojo = context.retrieve( "myKey" );
both throw ClassCastException if types are not assignable, but with
the second method users don't have to repeat the type by casting.
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 9:25 PM, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote:
> In my personal use of Chain, I am using it as <String, Object>. So
> typing as Context<K, V> is good. Though, do we need type T? Shouldn't
> retrieve(K) just return V?
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Simone Tripodi <simonetrip...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>> here I am!
>> sorry I'm late but just terminated to have dinner :P
>> I think that specifying the <extending Object> can be omitted, and
>> Paul's suggestion is the way to go, the code is more readable.
>>
>> The last added method can be improved, putting the K as argument
>> instead of String and <T extends V> as a strict check for output
>> argument:
>>
>> public interface Context<K, V>
>> extends Map<K, V>
>> {
>>
>> <T extends V> T retrieve(K key);
>>
>> }
>>
>> what I think is not so nice to have, is the Command, Filter, Chain,
>> ..., notation that, getting Context as argument in their methods,
>> would require generics...
>>
>> Lets' think about it, thanks for sharing your thoughts!!!
>> All the best,
>> Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>> http://www.99soft.org/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Elijah Zupancic <eli...@zupancic.name> wrote:
>>> Paul,
>>>
>>> You may be right. Which one is more idiomatic?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Elijah
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Elijah Zupancic <eli...@zupancic.name>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Thanks for your comments Nail.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that I've come around to see your point after sleeping on it.
>>>>> What do you think about this:
>>>>>
>>>>> Context.java - would be defined as so:
>>>>>
>>>>> public interface Context<K extends Object, V extends Object> extends
>>>>> Map<K, V>
>>>>
>>>> Isn't that identical to?
>>>> public interface Context<K, V> extends Map<K, V>
>>>>
>>>>> Then ContextBase.java would be defined like so:
>>>>>
>>>>> public class ContextBase extends ConcurrentHashMap<String, Object>
>>>>> implements Context<String, Object> {
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
