Lists

Terms and Conditions
Lists hosted on this site
Email the Postmaster
Tips for posting to public mailing lists

Re: Getters without the "get" part

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Getters without the "get" part

Subject: Re: Getters without the "get" part
From: Pascal Robert <email@hidden>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:47:28 -0400


Le 09-03-31 à 14:38, Mike Schrag a écrit :

I mostly agree (without really understanding idempotent, homonym, mutator or clarity).

Actually, I'd vote for a WO release that added "get" to all methods and provided no compatibility deprecation at all.

Cheers, Anjo
Officially the last thing I expected to hear.


Me too, I was expecting something like "brain-dead API changes" :-) _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden


Follow-Ups:

Re: Getters without the "get" part
From: Anjo Krank <email@hidden>
Re: Getters without the "get" part
From: John Huss <email@hidden>


References:  
  >Re: Getters without the "get" part (From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>)
  >Re: Getters without the "get" part (From: TW <email@hidden>)
  >Re: Getters without the "get" part (From: Simon McLean <email@hidden>)
  >Re: Getters without the "get" part (From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>)
  >Re: Getters without the "get" part (From: Dan Grec <email@hidden>)
  >Re: Getters without the "get" part (From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>)
  >Re: Getters without the "get" part (From: Mike Schrag <email@hidden>)
  >Re: Getters without the "get" part (From: Anjo Krank <email@hidden>)
  >Re: Getters without the "get" part (From: Mike Schrag <email@hidden>)




Prev by Date:
Re: Getters without the "get" part

Next by Date:
Re: Getters without the "get" part

Previous by thread:
Re: Getters without the "get" part

Next by thread:
Re: Getters without the "get" part

Index(es):

Date
Thread