Artem, what name do you plan to give to the BinaryInternalIdMapper? On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Artem Shutak <[email protected]> wrote:
> All Binary-related classes start from Binary. So, it's not consistent. > > We should chose between *BinarySimpleNameIdMapper* and > *BinarySimpleClassNameIdMapper*. > > Also, I'd like to move default *BinaryInternalIdMapper* to public package > (that uses full class name) and rename him accordingly. Any objections? > > -- Artem -- > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > I would suggest "SimpleClassNameBinaryIdMapper" > > > > > > > Is it consistent? Do we have other classes in the same package that start > > with word Binary? If not, then I agree. > > > > > > > > > > --Yakov > > > > > > 2016-01-14 4:59 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > I like the last one too. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:54 AM, Artem Shutak <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Igniters, > > > > > > > > > > I'm working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-2191 > > > (Binary > > > > > marshaller: support user classes with the same simple name) bug. > > > > > > > > > > The fix expects new BinaryIdMapper that uses a simple name of > > classes. > > > It > > > > > is required for supporting of platforms (.Net. C++). > > > > > > > > > > I would be glade to hear suggestions about good name for this > mapper. > > > > > > > > > > I propose the following: > > > > > - BinaryPlatformIdMapper > > > > > - BinaryInteropIdMapper > > > > > - SimpleNameBinaryIdMapper > > > > > - BinarySimpleNameIdMapper > > > > > > > > > > I like the last one, but it has a big length. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > -- Artem -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
