Open fanifieiev opened 4 years ago
@fanifieiev @paulodamaso I've already raised this question in the past: do we target with cactoos a lib with mostly OO decorators (such as those on Iterable
and Iterator
that are really great and unique in the Java world I think), or do we want cactoos to become a fully fledged collection implementation library?
The latest is a huge endeavour, and I wonder what anybody would gain from it: while the decorators provides something that does not already exists, there are many libraries implementing collections and they as OO as possible (because the java collection api is not great).
@fanifieiev @paulodamaso I've already raised this question in the past: do we target with cactoos a lib with mostly OO decorators (such as those on
Iterable
andIterator
that are really great and unique in the Java world I think), or do we want cactoos to become a fully fledged collection implementation library?The latest is a huge endeavour, and I wonder what anybody would gain from it: while the decorators provides something that does not already exists, there are many libraries implementing collections and they as OO as possible (because the java collection api is not great).
@victornoel In the description of Cactoos project it is stated that the target of the project is: Object-Oriented Java primitives, as an alternative to Google Guava and Apache Commons
, so why should this feature not be there then?
@fanifieiev so in the end, this is out of scope of cactoos for now until v1 is released, and then we can take into the scope
The Takes framework code contains a lot of boilerplate when using, for instance,
Map<String, Collection<String>>
. Example of boilerplate:Would be great to have something like:
Note: Need to think about specific implementation of collection passed to CollectionMapOf or create dedicated implementations for each use case like:
LinkedListMapOf
ArrayListMapOf
HashSetMapOf
TreeSetMapOf
etc @paulodamaso, @yegor256, @fabriciofx, @victornoel, @iakunin What do you think about it?