Completed without junit testing #1
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Mar-Alex yes, please write your own unit tests for your code. It would be better to cover everything with your own tests.
As for the abstract implementation — fell free to create additional abstraction if you feel, that it'll produce better results.
| @Override | ||
| public boolean removeAll(Collection<?> c) { | ||
| notNull(c); | ||
| boolean result = false; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This name doesn't show any real context here. I believe something like isChanged or isModified could be better here.
| private Object[] container; | ||
| private int size; | ||
|
|
||
| private int modificationCoef = 0; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think it is really a coefficient, but probably it is a counter.
| @Override | ||
| public boolean retainAll(Collection<?> c) { | ||
| notNull(c); | ||
| boolean result = false; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This name doesn't show any real context here. I believe something like isChanged or isModified could be better here.
|
|
||
| /**********************************************************************************/ | ||
|
|
||
| private class Itr implements Iterator<E> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Try to avoid such names, while they do not provide any suitable context within the name.
Probably, something like DirectIterator or just IteratorImpl would be better here.
|
|
||
| /**********************************************************************************/ | ||
|
|
||
| private class ListItr extends Itr implements ListIterator<E> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same for name here. ListIteratorImpl or BidirectionalIterator would be better here.
Should I write junit tests for or functional or just for methods that aren`t covered with standart tests?
Is it necessary to improve my code by creating additional class like
AbstractListinArrayListto avoid code duplicating inSubList?