Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #6649

Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted

Show all headers | View raw

On 29.07.2011 14:28, Ross wrote:
> I'm really confident that what I am doing is a really good idea. A lot
> of things that were tricky and/or non-intuitive or complicated have
> suddenly simplified right down, and it's a much, much, better
> structure program now than before I had this class. A fair number of
> classes which before had long and complex argument lists in their
> constructors now take one argument. And I find that when I find that I
> DO need access to the properties from one particular class, I just get
> them from this "central" object, and don't have to go around changing
> constructor calls elsewhere.

Downside is that now you have a dependency from all these classes to the 
single class which might seriously prevent reuse.  Also, it is far less 
obvious what kind of information particular classes really need because 
you just hand in the single large object.  And this /can/ make 
understanding the code harder.

Another typical example where things get so much easier is copy and 
paste: you do it modify the copy in one location and be done.  Headaches 
come later, especially if you fix a bug in one of the two  copies but 
forget to do it in the other one as well.  Plus, people might start 
wondering why the same code occurs in several places which also makes 
navigating the code harder: you won't find all the callers which use 
that specific piece of code since you alway only see callers of one copy.

What I am trying to say: "things are easier" is probably not a reliable 
metric.  Take this with a grain of salt because I don't know your 
application etc. but I would reconsider this.

> Calling it an "ApplicationContext" would work. As would calling it
> "ApplicationComponents", or "CommonComponents".
>
> I just wanted a name more exciting than that. At present it's called
> "CentralScrutinizer" which is not the best, and hence it's ripe for
> some sed-driven renaming. But I like the idea of this class having a
> distinctive name. Particularly since should anyone end up writing any
> plugins for my application, they'll have to make use of it.


 > PS: To address Patricia's concerns (which I can understand), then the
 > class name "ToolsAndComponents" is bang on for what it is. Just not
 > impressive enough. "CircusRingmeister" might be an alternative, but
 > not on topic enough.

The name "ToolsAndComponents" sets off an alarm - that's just too much 
and too unspecific.

Kind regards

	robert

-- 
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Really "BIG" class name wanted Ross <rossclement@gmail.com> - 2011-07-28 03:20 -0700
  Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-28 03:38 -0700
  Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-07-28 04:01 -0700
  Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-28 06:35 -0700
    Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Ross <rossclement@gmail.com> - 2011-07-29 05:28 -0700
      Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-29 06:36 -0700
      Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-07-29 15:55 +0200
      Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-07-29 14:56 +0100
      Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-07-29 15:08 +0100
      Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Silvio <silvio@moc.com> - 2011-07-29 17:32 +0200
        Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Silvio <silvio@moc.com> - 2011-08-01 13:47 +0200
      Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-29 09:25 -0700
      Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-29 23:08 -0700
        Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-30 11:24 +0000
          Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-30 06:10 -0700
            Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-08-01 16:22 -0700
      Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-31 02:29 -0700
      Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-08-01 14:22 -0700
        Re: "$" in class names reserved [was: Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted] Wayne <nospam@all.invalid> - 2011-08-02 02:33 -0400
    Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Ross <rossclement@gmail.com> - 2011-07-29 05:37 -0700
      Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Bent C Dalager <bcd@pvv.ntnu.no> - 2011-07-30 22:42 +0000
        Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted thoolen <thoolen@tholenbot.thorium> - 2011-07-30 23:38 -0400
  Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-31 20:32 -0700
  Re: Really "BIG" class name wanted Silvio <silvio@moc.com> - 2011-08-01 13:54 +0200

csiph-web