Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: >On 9/11/11 12:44 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: >> Perhaps we want to keep the ivars in one place since they all have >very >> carefully been decorated with final and volatile just in the right >places? > >There is only one field being maintained and I think it would >actually be clearer to push it into the (small number of) remaining >impls.
+1 - happy to see them go >> >> What about dropping "Object" from the name? That makes even less >sense now >> that we have generics enabled. > >Well, generic or no, what we pool r objects ;) Object pools make sense to me but I'm not wedded to the name. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
