Is language support for collections is a coin feature ?

[Ulf Zibis]

  My intention was to focus on consistent syntax:

Either use "=" or method invocations consistently.

-Ulf



Am 28.09.2010 23:55, schrieb Reinier Zwitserloot:
> Because arrays are obsolete. Also, in the example I showed, you're actually giving an 
> AddressBuilder to .add(), not an Address. With methods, you could accept either. This trick 
> doesn't work so well with arrays. Same story if generics are involved.
>
>  --Reinier Zwitserloot
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Ulf Zibis <Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de <mailto:Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de>> wrote:
>
>      Am 26.09.2010 05:51, schrieb Reinier Zwitserloot:
>
>         Advocate of the devil mode:
>
>         User user = new User()
>             .firstName("Remi")
>             .lastName("Forax")
>             .addAddress().zipCode("30785").done()
>             .address(new Address().zipCode("30785"));
>
>
>     See also:
>     http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/coin-dev/2009-March/001180.html
>     http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6479372
>
>
>         User user = new UserBuilder() {{
>             firstName = "Remi";
>             lastName = "Forax";
>             addresses.add(
>                 new AddressBuilder() {{
>                     zipCode = "30785";
>                 }},
>                 new AddressBuilder() {{
>                     zipCode = "67899";
>                 }});
>         }}.build();
>
>
>     Why not? :
>
>
>     User user = new UserBuilder() {{
>        firstName = "Remi";
>        lastName = "Forax";
>        addresses = new Address[] {
>
>            new AddressBuilder() {{
>                zipCode = "30785";
>            }},
>            new AddressBuilder() {{
>                zipCode = "67899";
>            }}
>        };
>     }}.build();
>
>
>     -Ulf
>
>