Skip to main content

Prefixing ALL swingx components with "JX"

6 replies [Last post]
Anonymous

I don't anticipate any controversy, but in the spirit of transparency...

Currently in the swing extensions package, the components which are direct extensions of existing Swing components are prefixed with "JX" (JXTable) and the ones which are new are prefixed with the Swing varietal "J" (JTreeTable).

I propose we prefix ALL swing extension components with "JX" in order to promote consistency and avoid confusion about what comes from Swing and what comes from JDNC.

I bring this up in case anyone can dig up a sound reason why we shouldn't make this simple change.

Aim

Reply viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
rbair
Offline
Joined: 2003-07-08
Points: 0

I agree, definately prefix them all with JX for the following reason: what happens if one of the new "J" components in JDNC become part of the standard distro in Swing? While a minor annoyance, it could cause confusion to folks using the new Swing distro and JDNC.

dhall
Offline
Joined: 2006-02-17
Points: 0

>> I agree, definately prefix them all with JX for the following reason: what happens if one of the new "J" components in JDNC become part of the standard distro in Swing? While a minor annoyance, it could cause confusion to folks using the new Swing distro and JDNC.

OK, assume some new control emerges from JDNC and is put into Swing. Aren't we really just shifting the naming burden onto Swing later? If so, then I think I'd rather live with the inconsistency here in what is essentially a lab for potential Swing upgrades then cause the same issue later in Swing.

Or is the proposal that new classes taken from JDNC into Swing would be renamed with a 'J' prefix in their Swing incarnation?

rbair
Offline
Joined: 2003-07-08
Points: 0

> >> I agree, definately prefix them all with JX for
> the following reason: what happens if one of the new
> "J" components in JDNC become part of the standard
> distro in Swing? While a minor annoyance, it could
> cause confusion to folks using the new Swing distro
> and JDNC.

> Or is the proposal that new classes taken from JDNC
> into Swing would be renamed with a 'J' prefix in
> their Swing incarnation?

Ya, that's what I'm saying. Sorry for the confusion. Let it be JXWhatever in JDNC, and JWhatever if moved into Swing.

Ronald Tetsuo Miura

We could use "JX" to indicate components that are extended versions of already existing swing components, and use "J" to indicate new components, without a standard-swing counterpart. I don't know if this is intentional but, at least, it seems to be happening, by quickly looking at the sources.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jdnc-unsubscribe@jdnc.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: jdnc-help@jdnc.dev.java.net

Amy Fowler

Ronald Tetsuo Miura wrote:

> We could use "JX" to indicate components that are extended versions of already existing swing components, and use "J" to indicate new components, without a standard-swing counterpart. I don't know if this is intentional but, at least, it seems to be happening, by quickly looking at the sources.

Yes, that is the way the naming sits now, but I am proposing we
prefix all swing extensions components with "JX" for consistency.
If someone sees JXTreeTable, then they can mostly assume it's the
treetable from JDNC.

Aim

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jdnc-unsubscribe@jdnc.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: jdnc-help@jdnc.dev.java.net

James Todd

+1

I think a standard/consistent prefix for all the (upleveled) JDNC classes
is a good pattern ... fwiw.

- james

Amy Fowler wrote:
> Ronald Tetsuo Miura wrote:
>
>> We could use "JX" to indicate components that are extended versions of
>> already existing swing components, and use "J" to indicate new
>> components, without a standard-swing counterpart. I don't know if this
>> is intentional but, at least, it seems to be happening, by quickly
>> looking at the sources.
>
>
> Yes, that is the way the naming sits now, but I am proposing we
> prefix all swing extensions components with "JX" for consistency.
> If someone sees JXTreeTable, then they can mostly assume it's the
> treetable from JDNC.
>
> Aim
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: jdnc-unsubscribe@jdnc.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: jdnc-help@jdnc.dev.java.net
>

--
Java == platform independence
XML == application independence
JXTA == network independence

Secure End-to-End Computing

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: jdnc-unsubscribe@jdnc.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: jdnc-help@jdnc.dev.java.net