• To: "'Elliotte Rusty Harold'" <elharo@m...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: InnerXml is like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
• From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>
• Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 18:16:04 +0100
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <p04330106b9b4f4851326@[192.168.254.4]>
• Organization: Propylon
• Reply-to: <bill.dehora@p...>

> From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@m...] 
>
> I can't say I find the collections API to be incredibly consistent 
> about return types. When we arguing similar points in JDOM, I noticed 
> that all sides of the debate could find justification for their 
> position somewhere in the Collections API. :-)

Indeed. Three options, pick one. Though I'm still of the mind that the
JavaBeans idiom is not the right one for manipulating trees; getting and
setting fields on an object, sure.


Bill de hÓra 
--
Propylon
www.propylon.com 

 

• References:
  • RE: InnerXml is like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Next by Date: RE: Underwhelmed (WAS: XOM micro tutorial)
• Previous by thread: RE: InnerXml is like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
• Next by thread: Re: InnerXml is like printf (WAS: Underwhelmed)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread