On 11/2/05, Aaron Trevena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/1/05, Peter Speltz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well after talking with Randal L. Schwartz from CDBI list, i'm > > convinced changing the name of the Maypole action is the only sane > > approach. It really is insane to have an action named the same as a > > CDBI contstructor . I filed a bug report about the incompatibility > > with IsA. > > > > Would any users complain if search and delete were renamed? > > Would an alias work for this.. I think search and delete are likely to > appear in a lot of code and a lot of places - aliasing them to avoid > them being wiped out could work correctly - then look at marking them > as deprecated and moving all default method names to do_foo could > work. > > Any feedback on that?
Dont know if alias would work or not. I have edit, do_edit , search, do_search (still need to rename) , create_new , do_create . .... So for me, I dont want to rename foo to do_foo. Besides it takse lots of code to setup a form and process it when you get into editing, creating, searching on Objects composed of many objects . So I say model the CRUD after edit and do_edit and dont name an actions after model functions. Cheers, ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php _______________________________________________ Maypole-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maypole-users
