Adrian Brock wrote:
Frankly, I've got better things to do than worry about whether
somebody can understand what a class does from its name without
reading the javadoc or even the code (it is open source).
There was no javadocs and
i did read the source code - but honestly it's
too complex for me to understand the usage of the classes and hence this
thread. The only reason i brought up this thread was to understand the
usage of such classes better and if there was more to it than just:
"Abstract" has nothing to do with the "abstract"
keyword in java.
That's all i wanted to know. I respect the freedom each developer has,
to name the classes as per his choice.
regards,
-Jaikiran