[Oorexx-rfes] [ oorexx-Feature Requests-1730364 ] Allow collection argument for the 'Set' class method 'new'

[SourceForge.net <no...@so...>]

Feature Requests item #1730364, was opened at 2007-06-03 16:07
Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by bigrixx
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1730364&group_id=119701

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Classes
Group: Next Release
>Status: Pending
>Resolution: Rejected
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Rony G. Flatscher (orexx)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: Allow collection argument for the 'Set' class method 'new'

Initial Comment:
Allow an optional collection argument for the 'Set' class method 'new'.

After creating the set instance the collection argument should be sent to it via the 'union' message. 

A constructor to handle the optional argument may look like:

    ::method init
      use arg coll=.nil

      if .nil<>coll then 
      do
         if \coll~isA(.collection) then
            raise syntax 93.948 array(1, "Collection")
         self~union(coll)
      end



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Rick McGuire (bigrixx)
Date: 2007-06-12 11:14

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1125291
Originator: NO

This is not a good idea, as it will make it difficult and awkward to
extend the new method to add additional options to the collections in the
future.  For example, adding initial capacity and expansion strategy
options to table, et al would be a good future enhancement.  This feature
overlaps with function already available to the particular collections, so
it doesn't really add any capability while at the same time creates
additional complications for the future. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Rick McGuire (bigrixx)
Date: 2007-06-12 11:14

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1125291
Originator: NO

Notice:  This RFE is slated to be rejected.

Reason:  See the RFE item in the SourceForge Tracker system for the
rejection reason. 

To appeal this rejection please contact the Appeals Committee via Mr. Chip
Davis

oor...@oo...

All further correspondence on this RFE should be directed to the Appeals
Committee and MUST include this RFE number.

The decision of the Appeals Committee is final.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Rick McGuire (bigrixx)
Date: 2007-06-12 11:14

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1125291
Originator: NO

This is not a good idea, as it will make it difficult and awkward to
extend the new method to add additional options to the collections in the
future.  For example, adding initial capacity and expansion strategy
options to table, et al would be a good future enhancement.  This feature
overlaps with function already available to the particular collections, so
it doesn't really add any capability while at the same time creates
additional complications for the future. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Rick McGuire (bigrixx)
Date: 2007-06-12 11:14

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1125291
Originator: NO

This is not a good idea, as it will make it difficult and awkward to
extend the new method to add additional options to the collections in the
future.  For example, adding initial capacity and expansion strategy
options to table, et al would be a good future enhancement.  This feature
overlaps with function already available to the particular collections, so
it doesn't really add any capability while at the same time creates
additional complications for the future. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1730364&group_id=119701