Hi All:
I think we still have naming problems with the Pair class reflected in this
Javadoc fragment:
* @param the first element type
* @param the second element type
Either we call them L left and R right, or we call them F first and S
second, but mixing both is not good IMO.
My preference
On 4 May 2011 17:58, Gary Gregory wrote:
> I think we still have naming problems with the Pair class reflected in this
> Javadoc fragment:
>
> * @param the first element type
> * @param the second element type
>
> Either we call them L left and R right, or we call them F first and S
> second,
Hey,
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> I think we still have naming problems with the Pair class reflected in this
> Javadoc fragment:
>
> * @param the first element type
> * @param the second element type
>
> Either we call them L left and R right, or we call
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> On 4 May 2011 17:58, Gary Gregory wrote:
> > I think we still have naming problems with the Pair class reflected in
> this
> > Javadoc fragment:
> >
> > * @param the first element type
> > * @param the second element type
> >
> > Eit
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Stephen Colebourne
> wrote:
>
>> On 4 May 2011 17:58, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> > I think we still have naming problems with the Pair class reflected in
>> this
>> > Javadoc fragment:
>> >
>> > * @param the fir
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Gary Gregory
> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Stephen Colebourne >wrote:
> >
> >> On 4 May 2011 17:58, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >> > I think we still have naming problems with the Pair class reflecte
