I think producing jruby_class_loader from getJRubyClassLoader (instead of j_ruby_class_loader) should be pretty non-controversial. However, the other issue touched on in the bug are the "hybrid" accessors like jRubyClassLoader.
In most cases those work out better than the getJRubyClassLoader case; e.g. getBasicThing becomes basicThing -- but the question remains: if we already have getBasicThing and basic_thing, should we be generating another method that doesn't exist in Java, yet is named according to Java conventions? -mental
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
