Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

COLLECTIONS-767 MapBuilder class to decide among various types of Maps #188

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Amita-Pradhan
Copy link

No description provided.

Copy link
Member

@kinow kinow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am used to choosing a map based on what I need, so not sure if I would use it immediately.

But looks very interesting at first. Needs a JIRA issue too (which is used for the changelog too).

Will take another look later. But fter a cursory look, code looks good.

Thanks for your contribution!
Bruno

@Amita-Pradhan Amita-Pradhan changed the title MapBuilder class to decide among various types of Maps COLLECTIONS-767 MapBuilder class to decide among various types of Maps Oct 3, 2020
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Oct 5, 2020

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.001%) to 90.129% when pulling b5cc1de on Amita-Pradhan:mapUtils into 6c35a01 on apache:master.

@Claudenw
Copy link
Contributor

Claudenw commented Aug 5, 2023

@kinow , @garydgregory , any reason not to merge this or should we just close the pull request?

@garydgregory
Copy link
Member

@kinow , @garydgregory , any reason not to merge this or should we just close the pull request?

If it were just me, I would close it. I feel I am better served knowing what the JDK offers , what Commons Collection offers, and the difference. It feels like a solution in search of a problem. I don't see using this in code I write FWIW.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants