Re: java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- From: Zig <none@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 23:29:51 -0400
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 20:22:50 -0400, Lew <lew@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
* The type has to be <Object,Object> due to backwards compatibility issues for APIs which used Properties in ways it was not intended for.
That's not it. It's because that's the only backward-compatible type for a class that came from 1.0 days. It's for APIs that used Properties in ways that it *was* intended for.
If your speculation was correct, then java.util.Hashtable and java.util.Dictionary would also be required to be of type <Object,Object>.
-Zig
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- From: Rakesh
- Re: java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- From: Owen Jacobson
- Re: java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- From: Zig
- Re: java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- From: Zig
- Re: java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- From: Lew
- Re: java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- From: Zig
- Re: java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- From: Lew
- java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- Prev by Date: Re: Java I/O Project
- Next by Date: Re: pass by reference
- Previous by thread: Re: java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- Next by thread: Re: java.util.Properties extending from HashMap<Object, Object> instead of HashMap<String, String>
- Index(es):
