directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Trustin Lee" <trus...@gmail.com>
Subject ReferenceCountingIoFilter vs ReferenceCountingIoFilterWrapper (Was: Re: svn commit: r411055 - in /directory/trunks/mina/core/src/main/java/org/apache/mina/common: IoFilter.java ReferenceCountingIoFilter.java ReferenceCountingIoFilterWrapper.java)
Date Sun, 04 Jun 2006 07:52:11 GMT
On 6/3/06, peter royal <proyal@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Jun 2, 2006, at 1:57 AM, trustin@apache.org wrote:
> > * Renamed ReferenceCountingIoFilterWrapper to
> > ReferenceCountingIoFilter
>
> Do we not want to call it a *Wrapper or *Decorator to indicate that
> it is a filter that will wrap another filter? I've always been in
> favor of doing that to make the usage of a class clear from its name...


Did we discussed about this naming scheme before?  Please blame my brain if
so. :)

I just thought that it is OK to omit the name of the pattern because we have
JavaDoc that can explain what it does in one sentence.  It is because using
the class means that we know what it does.  From the readibiliy viewpoint,
we can easily guess that it's a wrapper or a decorator because there's
another filter as a constructor parameter.  So I think it's fine to omit
Wrapper or Decorator in class names.

But this is only my opinion.  Let's discuss enough to get to the concensus.

Thanks for pointing out,
Trustin
-- 
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
--
PGP key fingerprints:
* E167 E6AF E73A CBCE EE41  4A29 544D DE48 FE95 4E7E
* B693 628E 6047 4F8F CFA4  455E 1C62 A7DC 0255 ECA6

Mime
View raw message