I have to say that "Urls" and especially "Xmls" don't work for me. It just doesn't seem right, somehow, especially when there's only one XML. The rest seem to work OK, though.
By the way, Sun isn't consistent within the JDK. There's at least one *Utils class, to keep Arrays and friends company. -- Martin Cooper ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 1:55 PM Subject: RE: Commons Util 1.0 release candidate 1 > I agree with you. For my own code I've always mimiced the java layout, and > added a W to the end (for wrapper). I plan to change this to an 's' or > plural version, so much am I swayed by your arguments. (That or 'Helper'). > > So I would suggest: > > org.apache.commons.java.io.Urls; > org.apache.commons.java.lang.Strings > org.apache.commons.javax.xml.Xmls > > > etc etc? > > I'm sure it'll just start arguments about everyones favourite methodology, > but people might all agree. > > Bay > > On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I'm not a committer and in fact I've never used the commons util stuff yet > > -- but I was looking at it recently and the only complaint I had was the > > naming scheme. This was probably discussed to death before I joined the > > list, but here are my two thoughts -- first, it seems as if having a package > > named "util" with classes under it that have "util" in the name (i.e. > > util.StreamUtils) is redundant... and second, there is already a precendent > > for a naming convention for these type of classes (util classes which hold > > several static methods that all have to do with a particular type of data or > > type) -- specifically that is the convention used by classes like > > java.util.Arrays, which is to name the class after the type that it deals > > with but make it plural. In the case of the commons util package, this > > would lead to changes like so: > > > > org.apache.commons.util.ClassUtils -> > > org.apache.commons.util.Classes > > org.apache.commons.util.CollectionsUtils -> > > org.apache.commons.util.Collections > > org.apache.commons.util.FileUtils -> org.apache.commons.util.Files > > org.apache.commons.util.MapUtils -> org.apache.commons.util.Maps > > org.apache.commons.util.NumberUtils -> > > org.apache.commons.util.Numbers > > org.apache.commons.util.ObjectUtils -> > > org.apache.commons.util.Objects > > org.apache.commons.util.StreamUtils -> > > org.apache.commons.util.Streams > > org.apache.commons.util.StringUtils -> > > org.apache.commons.util.Strings > > > > The only one I'm not sure how to deal with is "XmlUtils", which maybe just > > becomes "Xml". > > > > We have several packages like this here at work and it's lead to much better > > naming conventions for our methods, for example we have a > > com.cyveillance.io.Streams class and a com.cyveillance.io.Files class (we > > went one step further and put the utility classes directly into the > > appropriate subpackages the way the JDK does, but that clearly wouldn't work > > for a commons-util scenario), which used to have methods like > > copyStreamToStream() and copyFile() which, after we started using this > > naming convention, became "Streams.copy()" and "Files.copy()" both of which > > perform intuitively obvious tasks without having to have such verbose method > > names as well as just feeling more "natural" since they conform to the > > "Arrays.sort()" type of paradigm. > > > > Anyway, like I said, I'm not a committer or anything but it seems to me that > > this would be the way to go with the naming convention, and since I saw the > > message about a pending release I figured now was the time to speak up > > before more and more code gets written using the current naming convention. > > I know that changing around all of the class names is going to be a big > > pain, but it'll be easier now than later if anyone feels like it's worth > > doing. Oh well, there's my 2 cents. > > > > - > > John > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Daniel Rall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 4:07 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: Velocity Developers List > > Subject: Commons Util 1.0 release candidate 1 > > > > > > Prompted by Velocity's need (1.3 will use Commons Util), I've tagged > > RC1, which is available here: > > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/builds/jakarta-commons/release/commons-util/common > > s-util-1.0-rc1.jar > > > > Note that Commons Util is still in the sandbox (rather than in the > > commons module itself). > > > > Dan > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
