3 ms·
Couldn't you just put the ubiquitous data structures in a "com.proj.basic" package? EDIT: I'm using the word "ubiquitous" because that's what was used in the a
by visitor4rmindia 18y ago
Couldn't you just put the ubiquitous data structures in a "com.proj.basic" package?
EDIT: I'm using the word "ubiquitous" because that's what was used in the article.
- ntoshev 18y agoMost people treat packages just like bigger-than-classes chunks of related functionality and state. Typically there is a 'common' package for supporting stuff that is used all over the place, but these are not the data types most important for the project, these are just that project's particular incarnation of datetime utilities. The 'basic' package is certainly not common practice.
- silentbicycle 18y agoYes, but if you're subclassing them at all, then any extensions on the core data structures are very likely to get fragmented and scattered around.