Didn't want to blame you for the naming. By the time you implemented it, it was ok. :-)
Your suggestion sounds like a plan. I will modify it this way and contribute. Thanks for the reply! Am 27.07.2013 12:54 schrieb "Wim Jongman" <[email protected]>: > Hi Wim, > >> I renamed your method because of the meaning of the method. My >> getCommands() is the getter for the commands while your getCommands() do >> some additional processing in flattening the commands. So in terms of API >> design it is the better choice. But of course I can change that. Any >> suggestions for another name to the real getter? >> > > I totally agree that your naming is correct and that my naming is wrong. > However, we cannot change the contract of an API method. > > I suggest you do the following: > > 1. Copy your getCommands to getCommandList() > 2. Change the getCommands method as a delegate to getFlattenedCommands > 3. Mark the getCommands as deprecated and explain the deprecation in the > javadoc > > This way it is clear that the getCommands method is not correct, the user > can see from the javadoc which method to call and we do not break the > contract. > > Cheers, > > Wim > > > > _______________________________________________ > nebula-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev > >
_______________________________________________ nebula-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/nebula-dev
