On 3 July 2011 19:07, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > http://markmail.org/message/ml7efpvqezysvs2p?q=Validate+list:org%2Eapache%2Ecommons%2Edev/ > > Since this has gone quiet, I was going to follow through and rename the > validate* method (which are all @since 3.0) to check*. Someone else like it > it ;) > > But have two different verbs is smelly: Validate.check*(), As I mention in > the thread, a validator validates a state, so I like best: > Validator.validate*(). > > But changing an existing class name seems more controversial and possibly > more trouble than it is worth. If it were just up to me, I would just bite > the bullet and do it for the sake of nice and pretty, but I am concerned > about downstream users.
I have reviewed Validate, and am happy with it as currently written. It is also widely used, so I would recommend against change. It is an "assertion" class to replace the assert keyword in Java. The class name and method names all read OK in that context. Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
