Gary Gregory wrote: >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Henri Yandell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 12:12 AM >>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List >>Subject: [lang] VariableFormatter issues >> >>Our favourite 'will this become a templating language' class. >> >>Two issues to ask questions about: >> >>1) First enhancement request: #36873. Adds MessageFormat like format >>patterns. It's an enhancement, seems like a pretty good one to me as >>it is an enhancement that builds on the JDK and not a new feature. How >>does this sit on people's slippery slopes? > > > This is interesting and slippery. Since the submitted code uses > "MessageFormat.format", we are not inventing a language, just accessing > a JRE feature. > > OTOH, the class VariableFormatter is named as such *because* it is not a > "Format" subclass and was not intended to be. So providing "Format" > features via a subclass to VariableFormatter is clean in the sense that > we are not mixing things up but not really what I had in mind (that's > the great part about OS). OTOH (the OOH), if we really think this is a > fantastic feature, we should consider if it should be better integrated > than with a subclass. > > I like VariableFormatter the way it is. So I am neutral as to using the > submitted code. If we do use "VariableFormatterWithFormating", could we > consider better class name? >
Well I like it (maybe because I've submitted it) and use it frequently in my source codes. I wasn't really happy with the name too, still in my idea you don't need a sub-class a better idea would be a flag passed and turns on/off formatting but on the other hand this would maybe blow up the numer of API-Functions. Tom
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
