ws-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Hoegg <rho...@isisnetworks.net>
Subject Re: Vector, Hashtable, Java Collections
Date Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:15:02 GMT
Shapira, Yoav wrote:

>Howdy,
>
>  
>
>>Well, before I commit to Java 1.2 Collections, I'd like to explore the
>>possibility of doing away with Vector and List, Hashtable and Map.  Why
>>not create some semantically meaningful interfaces of our own that could
>>    
>>
>>then be backed by implementations that adhere to whatever JDK we want?
>>What do we gain by using Collections?
>>    
>>
>
>You gain several things from using java.util's interfaces, because
>they're a common standard in the java world:
>- More XML-RPC users are familiar with the interfaces, reducing the
>barrier to usage,
>- More XML-RPC users/developers can work with these interfaces, reducing
>the barrier to patch/enhancement contributions
>- Less code is specific to XML-RPC, therefore the XML-RPC distribution
>is smaller, simpler, and less buggy
>- More XML-RPC implementations can directly interact with these
>interfaces without custom code by the user, as interfaces such as Map
>and List have direct equivalents in other programming languages.
>  
>

Good points.

>On the other hand, what would you gain from defining your own interfaces
>for these structures?  Note that XML-RPC would be free to use whatever
>implementation, including a custom one not part of java.util, for the
>Map/List interface.
>  
>

The use of the Map and List interfaces in the core would prevent an 
applet module or a J2ME module
from sharing the core code with more fully featured modules.  That's 
really what I'm trying to address.
Perhaps we could use those interfaces internally and continue to expose 
java.util.* stuff via the APIs.

Having patched several bugs in the applet code as well and working much 
more in the "core", I think
refactoring the applet code to use the core is long overdue; I have 
mentioned that in bugzilla a few
times.  I am just brainstorming on how to accomplish it while improving 
the overall quality of the
project.

>Just thoughts on this issue ;)  I love how light and small XML-RPC is
>already.
>
As many others do as well, I'm sure.  I personally have little pressure 
to keep it light and small since
I have used it primarily in server apps and desktop clients, so its up 
to you guys to keep me honest! :)

--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net

Mime
View raw message