If Paul is right, and I do like his analysis, why doesn't the shorter
GET_ALL and GET_NONE work just as well?

--adrian 

On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 13:54 -0800, Jody Garnett wrote:
> I can go for that, my test is always the confusion test (can we read the 
> code and figure out what it will do).
> 
> Comparing:
> - new Query( "roads", Filter.GET_EVERYTHING )
> - new Query( "roads", Filter.INCLUDE )
> 
> Yours *is* more clear :-D So is there anyway I can get this down to a 
> single word?
> 
> Cheers,
> Jody
> 
> Matthias Basler wrote:
> > Definitely more intuitive. But now that everybody makes suggestions ... my 
> > personal favourites:
> > - Filter.GET_EVERYTHING
> > - Filter.GET_NOTHING
> >
> > ;-)
> >   
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Geotools-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to