Hello All: I think the argument for the name change I am hearing is: we are not formatting a la printf but we are replacing markers with values (and not formatting those values). Is that right? If that is the case, a "Substitutor" name is better.
As a general rule, I do not like or use abbreviations in class or method names (acronyms are OK by me). So I would say that StringSubstitutor is better. After all, we have "StringUtils", "StringEscapeUtils" and many others, not "StrUtils", "StrEscapeUtils". So I would ask that we use "StringFoo" for all of these classes. Gary > -----Original Message----- > From: Henri Yandell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 11:30 PM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List; Stephen Colebourne > Subject: Re: [lang] VariableFormatter - pre 2.2 > > On 7/23/06, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have reworked the VariableFormatter class along the lines that I was thinking. > I have committed it as StrSubstitutor so it doesn't clash for the moment and so it > can be easiy reviewed. > > > > This version does not have a separate parser class, but still supports escaping, > and matchers for prefix/suffix (which can now be set by users). The new class > should perform better as a result. > > > > I have removed the edge cases wrt resolving Objects, as they were rather ill- > defined. > > > > Otherwise, the basic functionality it supported, and the test case is slightly > enlarged. I still want to break out the resolver as a public abstract class before > release. > > > > Opinions > > Oliver, Gary, Tom? > > Looking to get Lang 2.2 moving out the door and this is the only blocker. > > Hen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
