activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Discuss: AMQNET-93
Date Mon, 09 Mar 2009 14:39:16 GMT

+1 for the first list.


semog wrote:
> 
> Well, I think this issue needs to be resolved.  The informal vote and
> preference is for List One, so I'll adjust the code to match that style.
> 
> - Jim
> 
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 2:53 PM, ybronsht <ybronsht@progress.com> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Jim, I understand your point about Oracle. First of all, we can tell that
>> Oracle is also ignorant of the framework guidelines from their naming of
>> "OracleXMLSQLException". I've actually seen this come up in a more
>> general
>> case in Microsoft's own products:
>>
>> There's a ServiceDescription class (represents a WSDL document) in the
>> System.Web.Services.Description in a .Net 2.0 assembly, and a
>> System.ServiceModel.ServiceDescription class in a WCF (.Net 3.0)
>> assembly.
>> Having worked on a WCF product for the past year or so, I've seen them
>> collide on many occasions. What is done (including in many Microsoft code
>> samples) is just a namespace alias:
>>
>> using WSDL = System.Web.Services.Description;
>> ...
>> var wsdl = new WSDL.ServiceDescription();
>>
>> The compiler will force the user to keep the naming unambiguous - that's
>> not
>> our job. And if the user wants to type those extra three letters for
>> visual
>> clarity, he can do that too - again, not our job. Let's let the user
>> decide
>> when those letters need to be there and when they can be done without.
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Discuss%3A-AMQNET-93-tp22255094p22256029.html
>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Discuss%3A-AMQNET-93-tp22255094p22413422.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message