On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <m...@apple.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Darin Adler <da...@apple.com> wrote: > > On May 31, 2013, at 8:01 PM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: > > One thing that always threw me was the term "Atomic" in the class name. I > wonder if the term "InternedString" would make it usage more apparent. > > > I personally love the name AtomicString (the string of tomorrow) and have > been using that name for it for the past 10 years, but I see that > InternedString is what this would be called in Java and .NET context so I > guess we could change to help people familiar with those. > > > If we were to change the name, I'd go with Symbol or Atom. But I think > AtomicString is a fine name and I don't think InternedString is better. All > plausible names I can think of are jargon that you have to learn the first > time if you don't know it. > I don't like "InternedString" either. In general, we should avoid using design pattern jargons like interning, mediator, flyweight, etc... when we can come up with a more descriptive name. - R. Niwa
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
