activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Gomes <e.se...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Discuss: AMQNET-93
Date Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:23:40 GMT
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.
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message