commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ImmutablePair and compareTo()
Date Fri, 03 Mar 2017 16:05:27 GMT
So would a further specialization be useful here for an immutable pair of
immutable objects? In my own applications, I tend to embrace immutability
everywhere (except for certain performance-intensive areas involving byte
buffers and encoding/decoding), so being able to make assumptions about the
underlying objects would be nice.

On 3 March 2017 at 09:58, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schaible@bpm-inspire.com>
wrote:

> Hi Matt,
>
> Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> > I took a look at this yesterday and forgot to reply. Anyways, I agree
> that
> > ImmutablePair should override compareTo() since it can rely on its own
> > values not changing, whereas the implementation in Pair isn't as crazy
> > since it's mutable.
>
> ImmutablePair is only immutable concerning the referenced objects, it
> cannot
> make any assumptions about those objects' immutability.
>
> StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder();
> ImmutablePair<String, StringBuilder> = new ImmutablePair<>("key", builder);
> builder.append("a");
>
> ImmutablePair just guarantees here that you will always have the same
> StringBuilder instance.
>
> Cheers,
> Jörg
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message