On 26.09.2016 11:25, Neil Bartlett wrote:
Module is already in the name: “java.lang.module.Configuration”. Wouldn’t
“java.lang.module.ModuleConfiguration” look really odd?
ah, you mean like List is enough for java.util.List and java.awt.List?
Configuration is a really common name in project
Most coding only uses the simple name, not the fully qualified one,
and Configuration does occur in other projects [1].
The original poster referred to the package, where Configuration is
the only non-exception class that does not have "Module" in the name
[2].
Stephen
[1]
https://commons.apach
Module is already in the name: “java.lang.module.Configuration”. Wouldn’t
“java.lang.module.ModuleConfiguration” look really odd?
Neil
> On 21 Sep 2016, at 16:18, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>
> I had the same thought while watching the slides. Configuration is
> certainly a class name that exis
On 21/09/2016 12:45, Richard Opalka wrote:
+1
I'd also propose FindException -> ModuleNotFoundException
Keep in mind that find/findAll throw FindException for a slew of
reasons, the "not found" case is just one.
-Alan.
This would only make sense if it was likely to have to deal with two
Configuration classes in the same source file. How likely is that? OTOH,
short names make code easier to read.
Just my 2c.
Regards, Peter
On Sep 21, 2016 8:19 AM, "Stephen Colebourne" wrote:
> I had the same thought while wat
I had the same thought while watching the slides. Configuration is
certainly a class name that exists other places, and would benefit
from being ModuleConfiguration. Layer is less common, so not worried
so much. Exceptions with "Module" in the name like
ModuleNotFoundException would also be clearer
On 21/09/16 11:58, Remi Forax wrote:
> I agree.
> And Layer should also be called Module Layer.
I don't really agree or disagree whether the above and previous names
might have been better choices but is it really important enough to
merit changing it all now after users have already started writ
+1
I'd also propose FindException -> ModuleNotFoundException
Richard
On 09/21/2016 12:58 PM, Remi Forax wrote:
I agree.
And Layer should also be called Module Layer.
Remi
On September 21, 2016 12:36:51 PM GMT+02:00, Kasper Nielsen
wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering if there are any reasons for w
I agree.
And Layer should also be called Module Layer.
Remi
On September 21, 2016 12:36:51 PM GMT+02:00, Kasper Nielsen
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I was wondering if there are any reasons for why these 3 classes in
>java.lang.Module
>
>Configuration
>FindException
>ResolutionException
>
>Does not include
Hi,
I was wondering if there are any reasons for why these 3 classes in
java.lang.Module
Configuration
FindException
ResolutionException
Does not include the name Module?
I especially am not to fond of the very generic Configuration name in my
source code would much prefer something like ModuleC
10 matches
Mail list logo