Re: [Vala] Libgee's Roadmap proposal

[Jiří Zárevúcky <zarevucky jiri gmail com>]

2009/7/21 Julien Fontanet <julien fontanet isonoe net>:
> Didier "Ptitjes" <ptitjes    > writes:
> > Jiří Zárevúcky wrote:
> > > 2009/7/20 Didier "Ptitjes" <ptitjes <at> free.fr>:
> > > > - Are there some things missing ?
> > >
> > > Could you fit in making Map interface a Collection? It is technically
> > > a collection of key-value pairs, and I see no reason why the interface
> > > shouldn't reflect it. :)
> >
> > Yeah. I agree on that, hence my question in the first mail about
> > exposing an interface for map entries (that key/value pairs).
>
> How is that possible, the methods' signatures do not match:
>  - Collection.add (G item) vs. Map.set (K key, V value)
>  - Collection.contains (G item) vs. Map.contains (K key)
>  - Collection.remove (K item) vs. Map.remove (K key)
>
> Collection implements Iterable which provides this method: Iterator<G>
> iterator () whereas it should be Iterator<Pair<K, V>> iterator () for Map.

The trick is that Map<K, V> would implement interface
Collection<Pair<K, V>>. Unless there is some serious bug in Vala, it
would work perfectly. The .NET framework does it this way and it
always worked perfectly for me.