Sorry Bill - I should've said "advocating" may be instead of
"explaining" - I guess the latter assumes it was kind of axiom - which
was not exactly the case
On 29/08/11 16:38, Bill Burke wrote:
>
>
> On 8/29/11 11:21 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>> On 29/08/11 16:12, Bill Burke wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/29/11 11:04 AM, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>>>> Just few days ago you were all explaining to Bill how important it was
>>>> to keep users happy
>>>
>>> Its funny because I've been trying to do the exact same thing: explain
>>> how important it is to keep users happy. A API design that makes sense
>>> and is self-documenting creates a lot of user happiness.
>>>
>> LOL :-)...
>> I'd say as a user I want to see
>>
>> target.path(...).header(blah).get();
>>
>> get() *is* a request. Thus request().get() is a duplication. The
>> transition may look better at the interface level - but no so at the
>> user level (at least to me). The problem is request() is only there to
>> address the case which most of users like me won't deal with.
>>
>> apologies if I sound like a broken record :-)
>
> And I've been saying that its just as important to have things
> understandable at the interface level.
--
Sergey Beryozkin
http://sberyozkin.blogspot.com
Talend - http://www.talend.com