Am 29. März 2012 22:07 schrieb sebb <seb...@gmail.com>: > On 29 March 2012 20:45, Benedikt Ritter <benerit...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> Hey, >> >> how about renaming CSVLexer.simpleTokenLexer() and >> CSVLexer.encapsulatedTokenLexer(), so that the method names express >> what the methods do? >> For example simpleTokenLexer() could be renamed to parseSimpleToken or >> parseSimpleTokenContent. >> Likewise encapsulatedTokenLexer() could be renamed to >> parseEncapsulatedToken or parseEncapsulatedTokenContent. > > They are private methods so the name is arbitrary. > I also think the current names are OK. >
I'm just saying, that method names usually are verbs (or contain verbs). They describe something that gets done be a method. Nouns are used for classes. It feels strange to have a method that is a lexer. I don't think that private method names are arbitrary. They are far less important than public methods. It's a matter of readability to chose good names for private methods as well. > I'm not sure I agree that the methods are parsers. > They are closer to lexers. > If the methods don't "parse", how about "scan"? >> Benedikt >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
