Re: Class names in java.lang.Module

2016-09-26 Thread Jochen Theodorou
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

Re: Class names in java.lang.Module

2016-09-26 Thread Stephen Colebourne
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

Re: Class names in java.lang.Module

2016-09-26 Thread Neil Bartlett
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

Re: Class names in java.lang.Module

2016-09-26 Thread Alan Bateman
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.

Re: Class names in java.lang.Module

2016-09-21 Thread Peter Levart
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

Re: Class names in java.lang.Module

2016-09-21 Thread Stephen Colebourne
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

Re: Class names in java.lang.Module

2016-09-21 Thread Andrew Dinn
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

Re: Class names in java.lang.Module

2016-09-21 Thread Richard Opalka
+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

Re: Class names in java.lang.Module

2016-09-21 Thread Remi Forax
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

Class names in java.lang.Module

2016-09-21 Thread Kasper Nielsen
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