diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index ab4064b7..60219094 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -2046,9 +2046,9 @@ In Dart's `List.unmodifiable()` case, it actually creates a defensive copy, so the resulting list is in fact immutable, though performance will be bad. However, it does have the mutating methods, only that they will throw an error if used. Ideally -you don't want mutable methods to appear in front of the programmer if the object is supposed to * -not* change, it will inevitably result in more confusion and debugging. All in all, this constructor -is basically an unfortunate workaround when it comes to the language design. +you don't want mutable methods to appear in front of the programmer if the object is supposed +to **not** change, it will inevitably result in more confusion and debugging. All in all, this +constructor is basically an unfortunate workaround when it comes to the language design. If you pass around an **unmodifiable list**, other code that accepts a `List` can't assume it's immutable. There are now, in fact, more ways to fail, because calling any mutating method of an @@ -2464,8 +2464,7 @@ the `ISet`. An analogous data structure for maps was also created, called `ListM 1. [Why doesn't Java 8 include immutable collections?][why_no_immutable_on_java_8] -- [The difference between *readable*, *read-only* and * - immutable* collections][3_types_of_collections]. +- [The difference between readable, read-only and immutable collections][3_types_of_collections]. - Basically, the `UnmodifiableListMixin` also exists in Java. For more, check [Arkanon's answer][arkanon_answer]. - I enjoy entertaining the idea that of all the code written in Java and running on millions of