On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Blake Sullivan <[email protected]> wrote: > I would go with valueOfDisplayName(). I would actually add a displayName() > as well, just like we have name().
Sounds good, will do. > I am not a fan of assuming that > toString() == displayName() Er... two options here: 1. Leave toString() documentation/contract intentionally vague. 2. Document the current behavior (toString() == displayName()) as the spec'ed/required behavior. I was leaning towards #2 since folks out there might be relying on the existing toString() behavior - ie. we could enshrine this as required behavior in our contract. Do you prefer #1? Andy
