commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <>
Subject Re: [clazz] Naming
Date Tue, 29 Oct 2002 05:46:16 GMT

[I'm only vaguely keeping up with the clazz world, so bear with me if I'm
saying crap here]

On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Stephen Colebourne wrote:

> Naming is always a tricky issue, especially when we get to a fundamental
> level such as this.
> Meta class names
> ------------------
> Java:
> Class, Field, Method
> Names proposed for [clazz]:
> Clazz, Attribute, Operation

Type, Attribute, Operation.

Class is actually the wrong word here anyway as I assume Interfaces will
be usable too. So 'Type' is really the superclass of Class and Interface.

So maybe Class, Field and Method would be implementations of Type,
Attribute and Operation :) Yeah.. I'm semantically juggling.

An argument against is that Java uses the word Class in most places [some
places it uses Type, ie Integer.TYPE] even when reflecting on interfaces.

> Instance class names
> ---------------------
> Java:
> Object, ., .
> bean, property, method.
> Names proposed for [clazz]:
> Bean, Property, Operation*

Bean implies that only Beans are handled. I would fully expect the project
to help me with things other than Beans, such as Listeners or just plain
generic methods [ok, this might just be MethodUtils].
Property also implies Beans. But on reflection I think you meant that. I
don't think beans call them methods, I think they might actually describe
them as operations. I know JMX talks about operations.

> MetaData name
> ----------------
> Attribute*
> MetaData



To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message