Sounds good. Let's do it.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Robert O'Callahan <[email protected]>wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Jussi Kalliokoski < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Path is also too generic even in the context of graphics. If we later on >> want to add a path object for 3-dimensional paths, you end up with Path >> and >> Path3D? Yay for consistency. Path2D would immediately inform what >> dimensions we're dealing with and also that this is to do with graphics, >> and thus sounds like a good name to me. >> > > Sounds good to me. > > Rob > -- > Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni > le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa > stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr, > 'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp > waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w >
