Re: [picocontainer-dev] package renaming
Mauro Talevi <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.java.picocontainer.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Paul Hammant wrote on Monday, May 21, 2007 7:37 AM:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I'm also keen to do renames. With Pete in the bar on Friday, we
>> agreed on ....
>>
>> MutablePicoContainer becomes PicoContainer
>>
>> But not on...
>>
>> PicoContainer becomes 'Components'
>>
>> ComponentSet ?
>> ComponentList ?
>
> ComponentProvider ?
> PicoProvider ?
> ComponentLocator ?
> PicoLocator ?
>
ImmutablePicoContainer?
I'd like to understand the full usecase for the rename.
Is it because most people end up using MutablePC? Not so, IMO, because if used with Nano, it the
opposite and people will mostly use PC.
The other possibility is to drop the distinction between PC and MPC and only have a method to create
an unmodifyable PC, just like is done in Collections. So the unmodifyable PC is a simply PC in
which the register methods throw exceptions.
Thoughts?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email