On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Oliver Heger
>>> wrote:
Two minor points from my side:
>>>
- Just a proposal: T
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Oliver Heger
>> wrote:
>>> Two minor points from my side:
>>>
>>
>>> - Just a proposal: There are some translators in the new translate package
>>> whic
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Oliver Heger
> wrote:
>> Two minor points from my side:
>>
>
>> - Just a proposal: There are some translators in the new translate package
>> which can be configured with a range of the codes to be processed.
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Oliver Heger
wrote:
> Two minor points from my side:
>
> - There are still many checkstyle errors in the current code base.
Can be improved but nothing felt hugely critical. A large amount are
lines greater than 120 chars. Looks like SystemUtils has been
formatted
Two minor points from my side:
- There are still many checkstyle errors in the current code base.
- Just a proposal: There are some translators in the new translate
package which can be configured with a range of the codes to be
processed. Would it make sense to use the Range class for this pu
On 4 March 2011 06:16, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Going through each.
>> ArrayUtils.hashCode() has been removed, but it had different
>> functionality to Arrays.hashCode wrt nested arrays.
DONE
>> I don't love the new Pair class.
New thread.
>> ArrayUtils.toArray() javadoc has example code that wo
Going through each.
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:59 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> I'm not overly enthused about some of the changes, but since I've not
> been paying attention its difficult for me to vote/block. Anyway here
> is my review:
>
> ArrayUtils.hashCode() has been removed, but it had diff
And I now realize that we could consider mutable vs. immutable Pairs
interface Pair (no setters)
interface MutablePair extends Pair (same as Map.Entry)
class BasicPair implements Map.Entry, Pair.
?
Gary
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> For my needs, I need som
Hi All,
For my needs, I need something akin to a Smalltalk Association and the
current Pair works but it is not how I would like to see it implemented.
I want an interface and a generics-based implementation (like Pair.)
I find it weird to write "Map.Entry myAssoc = ..." but our Pair should
impl
On 3 March 2011 18:56, Matt Benson wrote:
> [SNIP]
>> I don't love the new Pair class. We have an interface based version
>> here at OpenGamma to allow primitive implementations for performance.
>> I might be able to get our code released if there was interest.
>
> Providing interfaces without cod
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:59 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> I'm not overly enthused about some of the changes, but since I've not
> been paying attention its difficult for me to vote/block. Anyway here
> is my review:
>
[SNIP]
> I don't love the new Pair class. We have an interface based version
>
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> I'm not overly enthused about some of the changes, but since I've not
> been paying attention its difficult for me to vote/block. Anyway here
> is my review:
[snip]
> ArrayUtils.toArray() javadoc has example code that won't compile
> (missing "new") and also misses <
I know. Me late. Hope its better late than never...
Stephen
On 3 March 2011 16:04, Henri Yandell wrote:
> *waves hands* Beta release, ages ago, 3.0, started, ages, Blue Meanies!
>
> That said - excellent feedback, I'll try to go through it tonight.
>
> Cancelling vote; but more feedback from anyo
Hi Henri,
I'm not in the position to review ATM, maybe tonight, I'll let you know!!!
Have a nice day,
Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://www.99soft.org/
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> *waves hands* Beta release, ages ago, 3.0, started, ages, Blue Meani
*waves hands* Beta release, ages ago, 3.0, started, ages, Blue Meanies!
That said - excellent feedback, I'll try to go through it tonight.
Cancelling vote; but more feedback from anyone would be excellent.
Hen
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:59 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> I'm not overly enthused
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 4:01 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 3 March 2011 07:39, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> Looking to release 3.0; there's not been a lot of JIRA activity and
>> it's 9 months or so since we released the beta.
>>
>> Downloads:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~bayard/commons-lang3-RC1/
>>
>> Mav
Good feedback, thank you for taking the time to dig in. (I do not have to
time to patch ATM...)
Gary
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> I'm not overly enthused about some of the changes, but since I've not
> been paying attention its difficult for me to vote/block. Anywa
On 3 March 2011 07:39, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Looking to release 3.0; there's not been a lot of JIRA activity and
> it's 9 months or so since we released the beta.
>
> Downloads:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~bayard/commons-lang3-RC1/
>
> Maven repo entry:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~bayard/co
I'm not overly enthused about some of the changes, but since I've not
been paying attention its difficult for me to vote/block. Anyway here
is my review:
ArrayUtils.hashCode() has been removed, but it had different
functionality to Arrays.hashCode wrt nested arrays.
Object[] arrayA = new
Looking to release 3.0; there's not been a lot of JIRA activity and
it's 9 months or so since we released the beta.
Downloads:
http://people.apache.org/~bayard/commons-lang3-RC1/
Maven repo entry:
http://people.apache.org/~bayard/commons-lang3-RC1/maven/
Website:
http://people.apache.or
20 matches
Mail list logo
