Stephen, --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > from: Victor Volle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > It may be better to use Clazz and MetaClazz however. We should > probably > > > name either: > > > a) following reflection: > > > MetaClass/MetaField/MetaMethod > > > AClass/AField/AMethod > > > > > > b) create out own names: > > > MetaClazz/MetaProperty/MetaOperation > > > Clazz/Property/Operation > > > > > > (a) might initially make more sense, but is a method bound to a > specific > > > object (a delegate) something that should be named AMethod? > Operation > > seems > > > a better name. Similarly for Field vs Property. > > > > 1 Operation (because an operation me be abstract a method > generally not) +1
> > 1 Field > > Field is a problem because it clashes with java.lang.reflect.Field. > It can't be Attribute, as thats the metadata, thus Property. I would still keep Attribute on the list. After all, that's the word used in UML, MOF, XMI and many other places. We can come up with a different word for the additional metadata. Like MetaData. > > BTW: in XMI operations and fields are subsumed under the name > "feature". "Feature" is also used the same way by java.beans <snip/> > > > > 4. What about inner classes? > > > Do we care? > > Probably not. But can we then have a > > MetaModelFactory to plug in my own implementations for > > MetaClass and so on. (I would need it for my code generator) > > We will need various pluggable factories. I haven't started to think > about them yet. Check out the code I submitted to this thread. Does it make sense? <snip/> - Dmitri __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
