Re: JSR311: _at_*Param and List<?>

From: Paul Sandoz <Paul.Sandoz_at_Sun.COM>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:10:33 +0100

Stephan Koops wrote:
> Hello Paul,
> Dups doesn't matter. It's generally not defined for a Collection (see
> javadoc of Collection).

I know, that is the problem :-) what if one runtime chooses to use
HashSet as the underlying implementation for Collection and another
chooses to use ArrayList?

If we allow Collection we have to specify the policy on dups otherwise
it can cause interop issues where information is present when using one
runtime but potentially not when using another the other.


> Stephan
>>>>>> I think it is useful to allow also Set and SortedSet. Sometimes
>>>>>> the order is irrelevant and/or dublicates could or should be
>>>>>> ignored for the app. I propose also to allow Collection.
>>>> What would be the order and dups policy when Collection is specified?
>>>> I don't think Collection should be allowed and the developer should
>>>> be explicit about the ordering/dups through the Java type specified.
>>> Doesn't matter, that means runtime environment is free to choose. If a
>>> method requires a Collection, there is never a order defined.
>> And dups?
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

| ? + ? = To question
    Paul Sandoz