On May 4, 2011, at 9:02, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> On 4 May 2011 13:47, Matt Benson wrote:
>> At some point Hen mentioned the idea of a PairFormat class. I don't
>> think this is a bad idea, but the parsing capabilities of such a beast
>> would be minimal to nonexistent, and it still doesn't
On 4 May 2011 13:47, Matt Benson wrote:
> At some point Hen mentioned the idea of a PairFormat class. I don't
> think this is a bad idea, but the parsing capabilities of such a beast
> would be minimal to nonexistent, and it still doesn't seem that it
> would be configurable in a simple way witho
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> So
>
> While I can see the benefits of toString(String format), I'm
> struggling to understand what formatTo(...) gains Pair.
>
> I've added a test (in svn), and removed the Formattable interface from
> Pair (not in svn), and get the
So
While I can see the benefits of toString(String format), I'm
struggling to understand what formatTo(...) gains Pair.
I've added a test (in svn), and removed the Formattable interface from
Pair (not in svn), and get the same output, so implementing
Formattable appears to be pointless to me.
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 2:17 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Gary Gregory
>>> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Oliver Heger wrote:
> Am 25.04.2011 09:17, schrieb Henri Yandell:
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Henri Yandell
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Gary Gregory
>>> wrote:
>>>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Matt Benson
wrote:
>
Shouldn't the FormattableUtils SIMPLEST_FORMAT be "%s"?
Gary
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 2:17 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Henri Yandell
> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Gary Gregory
> wrote:
>
Am 25.04.2011 09:17, schrieb Henri Yandell:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Gary Gregory
wrote:
Hi All:
Now that we have the sh
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 2:17 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
>>>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Gary Gregory
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Henri Yandell
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Gary Gregory
> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Matt Benson
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Gary Gregory
> >>>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Gary Gregory
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi All:
>>> >
>>> > Now that we have the shiny and new Forma
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Gary Gregory
>> wrote:
>> > Hi All:
>> >
>> > Now that we have the shiny and new FormattableUtils class, what are the
>> > other opportunities in [lang
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>>> Date is in java.util; we put it in lang.time.
>>> MessageFormat is in java.util; we put it in lang.text.
>>>
>>> I think th
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> Date is in java.util; we put it in lang.time.
>> MessageFormat is in java.util; we put it in lang.text.
>>
>> I think this can live in lang.text happily enough for the same reason
>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Date is in java.util; we put it in lang.time.
> MessageFormat is in java.util; we put it in lang.text.
>
> I think this can live in lang.text happily enough for the same reason
> the other classes are in there. 'util' is a blah name :)
>
Date is in java.util; we put it in lang.time.
MessageFormat is in java.util; we put it in lang.text.
I think this can live in lang.text happily enough for the same reason
the other classes are in there. 'util' is a blah name :)
Hen
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Becau
Because Formattable is in java.util, IMO it makes sense in lang.util.
Gary
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Should it be in the text package?
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Gary Gregory
> wrote:
> > Hi All:
> >
> > Now that we have the shiny and new FormattableUti
Should it be in the text package?
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> Now that we have the shiny and new FormattableUtils class, what are the
> other opportunities in [lang] to eat our own dog food?
>
> --
> Thank you,
> Gary
>
> http://garygregory.wordpress.com/
>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Gary Gregory
> wrote:
> > Hi All:
> >
> > Now that we have the shiny and new FormattableUtils class, what are the
> > other opportunities in [lang] to eat our own dog food?
> >
>
> What did you have in mind?
>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> Now that we have the shiny and new FormattableUtils class, what are the
> other opportunities in [lang] to eat our own dog food?
>
What did you have in mind?
Matt
> --
> Thank you,
> Gary
>
> http://garygregory.wordpress.com/
>
20 matches
Mail list logo
