Question

I’ve been trying lately to implement some clean coding practices in AS3. One of these has been to not give away references to Arrays from a containing object. The point being that I control addition and removal from one Class and all other users of the Array receive read only version.

At the moment that read only version is a ArrayIterator class I wrote, which implements a typical Iterator interface (hasNext, getNext). It also extends Proxy so it can be used in for each loops just as a Array can.

So my question is should this not be a fundamental feature of many languages? The ability to pass around references to read only views of collections?

Also now that there is improved type safety for collections in AS3 , in the form of the Vector class, when I wrap a a Vector in a VectorIterator I lose typing for the sake of immutability. Is there a way to implement the two desires, immutability and typing in AS3?

Answer 1

It seems that using an Iterator pattern is the best way currently in AS3 to pass a collection around a system, while guaranteeing that it will not be modified.

The IIterator interface I use is modeled on the Java Iterator, but I do not implement the remove() method, as this is considered a design mistake by many in the Java community, due to it allowing the user to remove array elements. Below is my IIterator implemention:

 public interface IIterator  {      function get hasNext():Boolean      function next():*  } 

This is then implemented by classes such as ArrayIterator, VectorIterator etc.

For convenience I also extend Proxy on my concrete Iterator classes, and provide support for the for-each loops in AS3 by overriding the nextNameIndex() and nextValue() methods. This means code that typically used Arrays does not need to change when using my IIterator.

var array:Array = ['one', 'two', 'three']  for each (var eachNumber:String in array) {     trace(eachNumber) }  var iterator:IIterator = new ArrayIterator(array)  for each (var eachNumber:String in iterator) {     trace(eachNumber) } 

Only problem is… there is no way for the user to look at the IIterator interface and know that they can use a for-each loop to iterate over the collection. They would have to look at the implementation of ArrayIterator to see this.