Although i am not familiar with CSV's codebase, imho "get" is more straight forward, so +1 to Gary's suggestion.
On Saturday, 19 July 2014, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > Le 19/07/2014 13:48, Gary Gregory a écrit : > > > > > Can we go back to use "get"? > > > > We are running in circles Gary, Benedikt and I, if others could weigh in > > that would help. > > > > Circles, back and forth, to and fro, call it what you will. IMO this is the > nature of the kind of development we do. Decentralized, no water cooler, no > white board, all emails, leads to this development style, which is what we > have to live with. > > In this case, it seems we had to try the code several ways and see it > before we can decide. In an office, we might have decided in pair > programming in 5 minutes, this is not what we have. That or architect would > have created some coding edict that imposes coding style. > > So this circling is all OK by me ;-) > > Gary > > > > > > Emmanuel Bourg > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > <javascript:;> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > <javascript:;> > > > > > > > -- > E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com <javascript:;> | ggreg...@apache.org > <javascript:;> > Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition > <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> > JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> > Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> > Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com > Home: http://garygregory.com/ > Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >
