axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Doug Davis" <...@us.ibm.com>
Subject Re: Names
Date Sat, 04 Aug 2001 01:07:58 GMT
that's all well and good until you come across two packages that
both use "Message" and you need to use both in your code.
-Dug


Russell Butek/Austin/IBM@IBMUS on 08/03/2001 08:07:28 AM

Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org

To:   axis-dev@xml.apache.org
cc:
Subject:  Re: Names



Just my 2 nearly worthless cents.  I would much rather you didn't prefix
all names with "Axis".  It's redundant.

I've programmed to plenty of frameworks that had classes like
com.company.product.ProductThis and com.company.product.ProductThat and it
was just a nuisance to have to type those few unnecessary letters over and
over.  Keeping the class names simple doesn't cause conflicts.  At most it
might cause a bit of confusion.  But I always explicitly list classes in my
import statements (I despise "import com.company.product.*") so if I don't
remember where a class comes from, all it takes is a simple quick glance at
the imports list to find out.  And if there are two classes with the same
name in any given implementation, then they both must be fully qualified;
no confusion there.

Russell Butek
butek@us.ibm.com


Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS on 08/02/2001 11:56:01 AM

Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org

To:   axis-dev@xml.apache.org
cc:
Subject:  Names



One thing to think about doing (after the alpha) is going through
and renaming the classes that we plan to expose to handler
writers so they start with "Axis".  Names like "Message" are a bit
too common and will probably cause annoying conflicts for
people.
-Dug






Mime
View raw message