On Dec 12, 2011, at 3:45 AM, Mircea Markus wrote: > > On 10 Dec 2011, at 10:04, Pete Muir wrote: > >> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1474 >> >> Currently we do a mix of: >> >> enableXXX() >> disableXXX() >> enabled(boolean b) >> XXX(boolean b) >> >> where XXX is something to enable or disable (e.g. purgeOnStartup). We also >> the scatter the word use around in a very inconsistent fashion. > this is a bit ugly indeed
+1 >> >> I would like to rationalise this, and would propose that every boolean has: >> >> enableXXX >> disableXXX >> xxxEnabled(boolean b) >> >> The former 2 are nice for hardcoded config, the latter is nice when you are >> adapting one format to another (e.g. Paul). > I think this would be much more readable. My only comment is that we allow > two ways of doing the same thing, which might be slightly confusing for the > users. Also the easiness of migration from old to new configuration is > important, but IMO not as important to make the new config simple. I agree with Mircea that having two ways of doing the same thing might confuse users. If I had to choose I'd probably go for the latter option. >> >> I would deprecate the usage of XXX(boolean b) and useXXX(boolean b) and >> remove in 6. >> >> Thoughts? >> _______________________________________________ >> infinispan-dev mailing list >> infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev -- Galder Zamarreño Sr. Software Engineer Infinispan, JBoss Cache _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
