At 5:04 PM +0100 9/23/02, Bill de hÓra wrote:
>If you look at the 1.2 collections API, you find that methods do on
>occasion return when there are side effects on the underlying data
>structure. For example, a remove(key) call will return the removed
>value. So I think there's an argument to be had that it's reasonable for
>an append() call, which changes the underlying data structure to return
>a value. See Map.put() for an example, but be aware that returning true
>or false is also an option; see Collection.add() for an example of that.
>
Yes, but on the other hand you have methods like this one in java.util.List:
public void add(int index, Object element)
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. :-)
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) |
| http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
