commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [lang] Pair names still not right or consistent
Date Wed, 04 May 2011 18:56:36 GMT
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@joda.org
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On 4 May 2011 17:58, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I think we still have naming problems with the Pair class reflected in
> >> this
> >> > Javadoc fragment:
> >> >
> >> >  * @param <L> the first element type
> >> >  * @param <R> the second element type
> >> >
> >> > Either we call them L left and R right, or we call them F first and S
> >> > second, but mixing both is not good IMO.
> >> >
> >> > My preference is for K key and V value.
> >>
> >> Key and value implies a relationship between the two parts of the pair
> >> (the key somehow describes the value), which we cannot do
> >> (implementing Map.Entry is for convenience, not for any other reason).
> >> Either first/second or left/right are valid choices. At OpenGamma we
> >> use first/second but are able to change to left/right if this class is
> >> released.
> >>
> >
> > I think I like first and second better because we are in a package called
> > tuple after all.
> >
> > When I see left and right, I think of assignments. Why not top and bottom
> > too then? Just kidding.
> >
>
> Dee and Dum, ad nauseum...  left/right sit nicely with me as I don't
> place any real priority of one element over the other, which I think
> numeric names denote.  I think I like them for their monosyllabicity
> as well.  That said, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuple defines a
> tuple's elements as being ordered, thus invalidating half of my
> argument.  Are there any equivalents to first/second that are nice and
> short?
>

One, Two?

G

>
> Matt
>
> >
> >>
> >> > I still do not like Pair as a name because a pair is: two identical,
> >> > similar, or corresponding things that are matched for use together: a
> >> pair
> >> > of gloves; a pair of earrings.
> >> > (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pair)
> >> >
> >> > We clearly break this common sense definition.
> >>
> >> I understand that from an English language POV, but Java devs all over
> >> know this as a pair. No other name will do I'm afraid.
> >>
> >
> > I'll let it be then.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >>
> >> Stephen
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thank you,
> > Gary
> >
> > http://garygregory.wordpress.com/
> > http://garygregory.com/
> > http://people.apache.org/~ggregory/
> > http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Thank you,
Gary

http://garygregory.wordpress.com/
http://garygregory.com/
http://people.apache.org/~ggregory/
http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

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