> On 14 Apr 2015, at 14:00, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote:
>
> Peter,
>
>> On 14 Apr 2015, at 13:52, Peter Uhnák <i.uh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I was surprised to learn that DoubleLinkedList is descendant of Object,
>> while LinkedList is descendant of SequencableCollection. Is there a
>> particular reason behind this? Are they really so conceptually different
>> that DLL is not even considered a collection?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Peter
>
> DoubleLinkedList was added to help the implementation of [LRU|TTL]Cache. It
> was kept small and independent.
>
> Inheriting from [Sequenceable]Collection is a larger responsibility, entails
> more requirements.
>
> I would not be against this, although I am not 100% sure it is easy (some
> methods return the link nodes, not the elements, a distinction unknown to
> collections in general - LinkedList is a bit ugly in this respect too). In
> any case, it would have to be supported by enough tests. It could be a nice
> project for Pharo 5.
One problem with LinkedList is that it is used by the scheduler and carefully
written to be intererrupt-check free in some (undocumented) cases… in the past
this has already lead to very bad side-effects when people wanted to improve it
or change it.
Marcus
