On 8/2/06, Gary Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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.
I think in some places it was to avoid clash with JDK 1.5.
StringBuilder I presume being the one.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
