|
From: Rod J. <rod...@in...> - 2003-07-14 10:56:56
|
I vote to keep it. I think it's a pain to have to write such methods (new
Object[] {whatever}). It is unfortunate about the footprint, maybe we could
have a distribution without it?
Also it has 100% test coverage, so we know all those methods work.
Regards,
Rod
----- Original Message -----
From: "jürgen höller [werk3AT]" <jue...@we...>
To: <spr...@li...>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 8:00 AM
Subject: [Springframework-developer] removing ObjectArrayUtils
Does anyone mind if I remove ObjectArrayUtils from com.interface21.util? I
don't really like its approach over having dozens of overloaded toArray
methods that take all kinds of arguments and convert them to an Object
array. What's so bad about
new Object[] {"bla", "blabla"}
or
new Object[] {new Integer(1), new Integer(2)}
after all? Is ObjectArrayUtils' syntax really significantly nicer, i.e.
ObjectArrayUtils.toArray("bla", "blabla");
or
ObjectArrayUtils.toArray(1, 2);
Given that it has to overload such an arbitrary number of argument
signatures, I don't consider that worth it. And let's not forget that
ObjectArrayUtils.java has 74 KB (!), the class file still 58 KB. I vote for
removing it, any application code that uses it (if any at all) is very easy
to convert (see above).
Juergen
DI Jürgen Höller
Senior System Architect
______________________________________
werk3ATS - division systementwicklung
part of werk3AT internetmedien oeg
europaplatz 4
A - 4020 linz
t. +43 (0) 732 71 65 29 502
f. +43 (0) 732 71 65 29 3
jue...@we...
www.werk3at.com
______________________________________
werk3ATS - WIR ENTWICKELN ERFOLG
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Parasoft
Error proof Web apps, automate testing & more.
Download & eval WebKing and get a free book.
www.parasoft.com/bulletproofapps1
_______________________________________________
Springframework-developer mailing list
Spr...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer
|