This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.

Bug 38445 - New Children.Keys methods
Summary: New Children.Keys methods
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 32708
Alias: None
Product: platform
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Nodes (show other bugs)
Version: 3.x
Hardware: All All
: P3 blocker (vote)
Assignee: Petr Nejedly
URL:
Keywords: API, PERFORMANCE
Depends on: 32708
Blocks:
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2004-01-06 18:03 UTC by _ pkuzel
Modified: 2008-12-22 22:50 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT
Exception Reporter:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description _ pkuzel 2004-01-06 18:03:39 UTC 
Currently there is only one method allowing to set
keys replacing original keys. It implies some
rather heavy computaion that is unnecessary if
client knows that it want to append new keys or
remove existing keys without any merging.

  /**
   * appends mentioned keys to existing key set
   */
  protected final appendKeys(Object[] keys);

and (not so important) method

  protected final removeKeys(Object[] keys);
Comment 1 _ pkuzel 2004-01-06 18:05:29 UTC 
It could be called  addKeys() and driven by setBefore() strategy too.
Comment 2 Petr Nejedly 2004-01-07 11:06:29 UTC 
Children.Keys is already bloated enough and we can't make it into 3.6
anyway, so I'd rather refuse this and suggest to use some lightweight
Children subclass after issue 32708 gets finished and merged,
especially in case of strict 1:1 mapping.
Comment 3 _ pkuzel 2004-01-07 12:44:51 UTC 
I though about implemeting my own children but I have not found any
way how to notify about change. There is probaly some package private
contract.
Comment 4 Petr Nejedly 2004-01-07 13:00:33 UTC 
Yes, this is why I referred to 32708 (and issue 35833).
Comment 5 Jesse Glick 2004-01-07 17:27:41 UTC 
I agree.
Comment 6 _ pkuzel 2004-05-07 19:09:05 UTC 
I like issue #32708 approach.

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 32708 ***