george.moschovitis at gmail.com
Tue Apr 18 10:59:17 EDT 2006
BuilderObject is ok, lets stick on this...
On 4/18/06, TRANS <transfire at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/18/06, James Britt <james_b at neurogami.com> wrote:
> > George Moschovitis wrote:
> > >>Something like XmlBlaster?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > naah ;-)
> > :) I was being fairly facetious.
> > I'm curious, though, what people think of trying to foster a particular
> > metaphor or imagery for Og/Nitro and its related libraries.
> > On the one hand, it can improve name recognition; the downside is that
> > trying to pick names that fit into some particular theme can lead to
> > some extreme goofiness.
> Well I ended up being fairly conervative and named it BuilderObject,
> since it is meant to be subclassed and not used directly, it fits the
> pattern of other classes like BasicObject and MockObject, etc.
> As for the theme naming, I think that's good at higher levels. Facets
> is a general purpse library. Nitro uses Facets and since Nitro is the
> "biggest" user of Facets it gets special consideration, clearly. Yet
> everything in Facets must be general purpose. Personally, I think
> that's one of the strengths of this relationship. At times it makes
> things more difficult, but in the end I think the projects are better
> for it. Anyway, that also means theme naming doesn't apply to Facets
> in this way.
> Nonetheless "Blaster" is kind of cool and I actually seriously
> consider it at first :-)
> Nitro-general mailing list
> Nitro-general at rubyforge.org
More information about the Nitro-general