On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I vaguely recall someone advocating that we post fix all our tasks > with "Task" (was that you Erik?).
Why? ExecuteOn.java used to implement <execon> (something you could guess by then) and we later renamed that task as <apply> - so people have to look up which class implements <apply>, they cannot guess it. Using above rule, the class would have been ExecOnTask - how would that improve the situation? Same for CallTarget.java that would be CallTargetTask, not AntCallTask ;-) Maybe it would be better to not place any classes into the taskdefs package that are not implementations of tasks but utility classes? > any objections or not? Other than "I don't like it"? No. But I don't like pre/post-fixing my variable names either and do so in environments where I have to. Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
