On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Are there any objections to changing the API sigs from foo(double[] values) >> to foo(double... values) ? > > Yes. I am -0 for adding new methods that take varargs; -1 for > removing the double[] versions.
Phil note that foo(double... values) actually has the same signature, foo(double[]), in the byte code. This would not amount to adding or removing methods, or even a signature change. The downside is the inconsistency between declaring both foo(double...) and foo(double[], int, int) although you could argue that in the latter case, you're definitely meaning to operate on an array and that's why it's different. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
