deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Allen <dan.j.al...@gmail.com>
Subject [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-8] @Veto
Date Fri, 23 Dec 2011 20:17:56 GMT
Veto is rationally the most appropriate since it directly translates to
calling ProcessAnnotatedType#veto()

However, I'd like to offer one other alternative:

@Skip

While veto describes what the extension is doing internally, skip is how
the developer perceives the result of the action. The class is "skipped
over" during the scanning process. This is similar to the suggestion
@Ignore, and I think both would get the point across equally well.

-Dan

p.s. Apologizes for dropping the rest of the thread. I wasn't receiving
messages when this thread started.

-- 
Dan Allen
Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597

http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen#about
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction

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