On Sat, 25 Apr 2009, Frederik Holljen wrote:

> On 25/04/2009, Tobias Schlitt <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On 04/24/2009 11:17 PM Frederik Holljen wrote:
> >
> > > I propose:
> > > ezcPersistentSessionBase or Definition for the interface
> > > ezcPersistentSessionIdentityDecorator for the decorator
> >
> > > Somewhat longer but more descriptive and you'll only write it once 
> > > anyway...
> >
> > I agree with ezcPersistentSessionIdentityDecorator, that sounds 
> > good. However, ezcPersistentSessionBase sounds like an abstract 
> > class not like an interface.
>
> I agree. What about my other suggestion 
> ezcPersistentSessionDefinition? I really don't like the idea to name a 
> class something with object. It messes with the OO definitions.. it's 
> a class, not an object. Another option is to use foundation: 
> ezcPersistentSessionFoundation

I like foundation (and the ezcPersistentSessionIdentityDecorator) sounds 
fine too, although it's a tad (too) long IMO.

regards,
-- 
Derick Rethans
eZ components Product Manager
eZ systems | http://ez.no
-- 
Components mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ez.no/mailman/listinfo/components

Reply via email to