On 21.11.2012 18:55, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguc...@gmail.com
<mailto:siguc...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 21 November 2012 12:47, Fernando Olivero
<fernando.oliv...@usi.ch <mailto:fernando.oliv...@usi.ch>> wrote:
> I totally agree. Dummy does not tell me about the class.
>
> Are there just 3 uses of Dummy in the core?
>
> We should either use Null or use a specific prefix always, so
its form a
> consisten pattern.
>
> DummyUIManager -> NullUIManager
>
yes, not "Headless" please.
why?
It is not a complete NULL UIManager. A NullUIManager would implement
all the API and do nothing (or implement nothing but only
#doesNotUnderstand: doing nothing or something like that)
DummyUIManger DOES stuff, but it makes sures not to end up calling
the UI (like progress bar, notifications, confirmations, etc). So, in
this particular case, HeadlessUIManager is much more accurate for me
than Null.
Same can be said for DummySoundSystem, it does route the Beeper sound to
a tangible place. ;)
How about MinimalXXX?
As in, they do the least amount of things possible to still remain
useful in a limited, yet non-null manner.
Cheers,
Henry
