+1
Stef
Le 14/4/15 17:02, Sven Van Caekenberghe a écrit :
On 14 Apr 2015, at 16:46, Peter Uhnák wrote:
DoubleLinkedList was added to help the implementation of [LRU|TTL]Cache. It was
kept small and independent.
Does that mean that I probably shouldn't touch it? Because when I wanted to use D
I think that LinkedList should be a private class nobody should use :).
Better use DoubleLinkedList which should be packaged with extended
collection.
Le 14/4/15 17:07, Henrik Johansen a écrit :
On 14 Apr 2015, at 2:09 , Marcus Denker wrote:
On 14 Apr 2015, at 14:00, Sven Van Caekenberghe
> On 14 Apr 2015, at 2:09 , Marcus Denker wrote:
>
>
>> On 14 Apr 2015, at 14:00, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
>>
>> Peter,
>>
>>> On 14 Apr 2015, at 13:52, Peter Uhnák wrote:
>>>
>>> I was surprised to learn that DoubleLinkedList is descendant of Object,
>>> while LinkedList is descendan
I guess the "System-Caching" package which I noticed just now is a bit
telling. :)
I'll make an issue.
Peter
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
>
> > On 14 Apr 2015, at 16:46, Peter Uhnák wrote:
> >
> > DoubleLinkedList was added to help the implementation of [LRU|TT
> On 14 Apr 2015, at 16:46, Peter Uhnák wrote:
>
> DoubleLinkedList was added to help the implementation of [LRU|TTL]Cache. It
> was kept small and independent.
> Does that mean that I probably shouldn't touch it? Because when I wanted to
> use DDL I ran into a problem that once I add somethin
Also linksDo: method is missing.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Peter Uhnák wrote:
> DoubleLinkedList was added to help the implementation of [LRU|TTL]Cache.
>> It was kept small and independent.
>
> Does that mean that I probably shouldn't touch it? Because when I wanted
> to use DDL I ran in
>
> DoubleLinkedList was added to help the implementation of [LRU|TTL]Cache.
> It was kept small and independent.
Does that mean that I probably shouldn't touch it? Because when I wanted to
use DDL I ran into a problem that once I add something to the list, I can
no longer access the Links. Linked
Peter Uhnák wrote
> Are they really so conceptually different
> that DLL is not even considered a collection?
I just reread GOF and reinforced an important idea. Although we often
conflate the two, types and classes are not the same. Inheritance is an
implementation detail about avoiding duplicati
> On 14 Apr 2015, at 14:00, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
>
> Peter,
>
>> On 14 Apr 2015, at 13:52, Peter Uhnák wrote:
>>
>> I was surprised to learn that DoubleLinkedList is descendant of Object,
>> while LinkedList is descendant of SequencableCollection. Is there a
>> particular reason beh
Peter,
> On 14 Apr 2015, at 13:52, Peter Uhnák 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
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
