Well, I'm not a native English speaker but to me "isOnOrBefore" is more suitable for dates. For datetimes/times, my feeling says it should be "isAtOrBefore", which does not help for consistency when using this naming scheme.
my 2 cents. Bart. 2008/1/2, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Paul Field wrote: > > I'm for having the methods, although I prefer the "isOnOrAfter/isOnOrBefore" > > naming. > > > > For me, the reason for having the extra methods is for readability; > > '!a.isAfter(b)' is logically equivalent to 'a.isOnOrBefore(b)' but they read > > differently and so can make code easier to understand. If the naming of the > > method is "isNotAfter" then I don't see the advantage over using the > > existing > > method with the not operator (!a.isAfter(b)). > > These are the options: > > !a.isAfter(b) > a.isNotAfter(b) > a.isOnOrBefore(b) > > Personally, I am finding the latter two considerably more readable than > the existing code. However, which method naming you pick probably > depends on your exact use case - which is of course a problem (and thus > why we have votes 50/50 for each :-) > > Stephen > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > Joda-interest mailing list > Joda-interest@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Joda-interest mailing list Joda-interest@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/joda-interest
