If I may state my humble opinion:
1) users, even java-based ruleset authors, do not care l about how
ugly our internal code is :)
1b) I like single concise class with few entries more than a
pack of 5-line .java files.
2) RulePhase.<Ctrl+space> is much much quicker than looking
up the information.
The thing is, that our users do not even know that there's
some superclass they can look for, they will just copy the
quickstarts, and seeing
RulePhase.Initial.class suggests very clearly that there are more
to pick from in RulePhase. Whereas "InitialPhase.class" doesn't.
3) Keeping them in one file will make it easier for us to maintain
- the order will be hinted by the order of appearance, and
potential errors getExecuteAfter() will be more obvious.
my2c.
Ondra
On 27.1.2015 04:39, Lincoln Baxter,
III wrote:
Hey, good question, but no. You can always look
in that package and see all of the phases we have. Or use the
IDE to quick-search for types implementing RulePhase, etc. Not
worth making ugly code for that when the IDE or GitHub will
tell you exactly the same information.
_______________________________________________
windup-dev mailing list
windup-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/windup-dev
_______________________________________________
windup-dev mailing list
windup-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/windup-dev