Brett Porter wrote > > On 01/04/2010, at 7:00 PM, Alexander Klimetschek wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 09:12, Bertrand Delacretaz >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> In the above example, the >>> PackageFooBarClassWizMethodGetSomethingProblemComputeException name >>> makes it very clear that there was a problem in the getSomething >>> method of the Wiz class in package foo.bar, and the problem is a >>> ComputeException. Bit of a longish name, but we all have cool IDEs, >>> right? >> >> +1, but I think this isn't enough information. We should include the >> author and revision number as well, so that people can easily find out >> which version of the code to look at and who to blame on the mailing >> list. >> >> Anything else? Maybe other interesting metadata such as the editor/IDE >> in which the code was written, a short twitter-like status, etc. So we >> get something like this: >> >> PackageFooBarClassWizMethodGetSomethingProblemComputeExceptionRevision201041WrittenByBertrandInEclipse35NiceWheatherToday > > The only problem I can see here is that you are approaching the 140-character > limit, and given all future communication is likely to take place on Twitter > it will be difficult to tell your fellow developer what went wrong at all. > Perhaps it needs a built-in shortening service that IDEs will soon adopt and > generate for you? > > The above would generate some code like "dcXTUr" or "FaiLlolz", so the > exception is reduced to "on.excepti.FaiLlolz" > > Then you can easily tweet it: "@bdelacretaz argh, you broke FooBarClass > again! http://excepti.on/FaiLlolz #spp" > Awesome, I think to simplify the first implementation we can hard code some information like the author to the values from above...
Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler [email protected]
