Skip to main content

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

  • From: Martin Desruisseaux < >
  • To:
  • Subject: Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity
  • Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:49:12 +0900
  • Organization: Geomatys

Le 17/10/14 19:39, Werner Keil a écrit :
>
> Beside, the JDK is full of lies and semantic inconsistensies;-/
>
Maybe, but all the examples that you gave below are about naming
conventions. None of them are *logically* wrong. By "logical" I means
the mathematical sense, not intuition. This is very different from
UNITSOFMEASUREMENT-62 which is wrong, not in my opinion but under the
laws of logic.

    Martin



> java.util.Calendar as awkward as its mutable behavior might be applied
> semantics and naming conventions much more correctly than
> java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;-)
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1335959/singular-or-plural-for-enumerations
>
> The latter was introduced with Java 5 after enums existed, but clearly
> violates pretty much every common sense for naming enums not to
> mention a Unit rather than a "Collection" of them.
>
> JSR 310 in its early form I reviewed (as one of few EC Members doing
> so;-) used Concurrent TimeUnit directly. Hence, while some things got
> renamed, e.g. Time to Temporal the mistake of TimeUnit (using Singular
> for the type, but Plural for its values) was bluntly copied. Just like
> the entire DateFormat with its pattern strings was copied rather than
> reused. Creating anothe of many redundancies in 310.
> Last but not least, TemporalAmount should have been called
> TemporalMap, because all it really does is mimick and clone
> java.util.Map with its get() method.
> A true Amount would look like the ones in JScience, OUMo or JSR 354.
> That may allow e.g. a MonetaryQuery or other API constructs (all and
> more like TemporalField, 310 got redundantly and usually competing
> rather than synergetic;-O) to gather information like "How many notes
> or coins of each type do I have in my pocket?", but MonetaryAmount has
> a straight getNumber() method rather than get(Coin) ;-)
>
> There is more, e.g. Java SE 9 has plans to offer factory methods like
> of() to an interface like Map, List or Set as opposed to concrete classes.
> Among few libraries thrown into OpenJDK 310 here insists on concrete,
> final classes, while a factory like of() exists (in many redundant
> variations like ofNanosAndMillis() ;-/) while Collection API seriously
> considers that factory on the interface, since SE 8 a static method is
> possible there.
> However, what would the default be, if you define List.of() to take
> e.g. an array of things to add?
> ArrayList, LinkedList,...?
>
> That goes exactly where AbstractQuantity.of() was, at least in RI and
> Java7/ME8 that's the closest we can get, from SE 8 in theory even
> Quantity could have that static method like that;-)
> @Otavio, please let's talk about that separately, if JDK prefers of()
> to an abstract type (including interfaces) we should consider going
> back there, too and avoid the "Quantities" helper class;-)
>
> Werner
>



Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

(continued)

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Otávio Gonçalves de Santana 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Werner Keil 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/18/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Leonardo Lima 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/18/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/18/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Otávio Gonçalves de Santana 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Otávio Gonçalves de Santana 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Werner Keil 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Werner Keil 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/18/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/18/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/18/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/18/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Werner Keil 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/18/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Werner Keil 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/17/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Martin Desruisseaux 10/18/2014

Re: Remove "generic" multiply/divide operations from Quantity

Jean-Marie Dautelle 10/17/2014
 
 
Close
loading
Please Confirm
Close