Once people get Can, I think it makes sense, so I think we can leave it. As a replacement, I can't think of a good real-life example of a thing with a failure indicator that fits the bill. :)
What about OptionWithFailure, OptionWF, OptWithF? It's more typing, but it's accurate. FailureIndicatingOption? FIOption? On Dec 20, 9:43 am, "David Pollak" <[email protected]> wrote: > Folks, > > Over the year that Lift has had Can[T] as a replacement for Scala's > Option[T], the name "Can" has required a lot of explaining. > > As we make the final push into freezing Lift's APIs, do we want to change > the name of Can to something else or should we leave it as Can. > Alternatives are: > > - Cup > - Box > > Both of which can be Full/Empty. > > Thanks, > > David > > PS -- The Scala collections classes are getting a redo for 2.8. I've been > gently pestering Martin to expand Option to have a Failure case. If this > happens (it's not really likely for a couple of reasons), Can will be > orphaned. > > -- > Lift, the simply functional web frameworkhttp://liftweb.net > Collaborative Task Managementhttp://much4.us > Follow me:http://twitter.com/dpp > Git some:http://github.com/dpp --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
