Hello Javen,
Thanks for you reply, when i sended the code, i have writend quickly,
however, if this feature i`ll be aproved, i will follow java / API
convension.
Ps. When I think in "between function", the first thing that comes in the
head is SQL BETWEEN ...
Obrigado.
Atenciosamente
Lucas Car
Hi Gilles,
When was thinking about this implementation, i was thinking in primitive
types and Object (Integer, Double), but for Object, i think "Range" is
ok to use.
Thanks,
Lucas
On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Gilles
wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 14:25:32 +0100, Jan Matèrne wrote:
>
>>
I'm -1 for a static function as suggested by Lucas. It doesn't improve code
readability, and I'd argue that it decreases readability because of needing
to memorize operator order, ambiguous inclusivity of endpoints (unless you
add isStrictlyBetween), and doesn't gracefully handle mixed data types,
On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 14:25:32 +0100, Jan Matèrne wrote:
Maybe open the comparators and use a fluent API?
is(42).between(10).and(50) == true
is(10).between(10).and(20) == false
is(10).between(10).and(20).includingLeft() == true
is(50).between(10).and(50) == false
is(50).between(10).and(50).includin
Maybe open the comparators and use a fluent API?
is(42).between(10).and(50) == true
is(10).between(10).and(20) == false
is(10).between(10).and(20).includingLeft() == true
is(50).between(10).and(50) == false
is(50).between(10).and(50).includingRight() == true
Just quick thoughts ...
Jan
> -
