On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
>> > On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Gary Gregory
>> wrote:
>> >> On Apr 23, 2011, at 7:10, "Jörg Schaible"
>> wrote:
>> >>
>>
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Gary Gregory
> wrote:
> >> On Apr 23, 2011, at 7:10, "Jörg Schaible"
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Gary Gregory wrote:
> >>>
> Hi All:
>
> I fin
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Matt Benson wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> On Apr 23, 2011, at 7:10, "Jörg Schaible" wrote:
>>
>>> Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>
Hi All:
I find that the new 'valid' method names in Validate make for odd reading.
>>>
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Apr 23, 2011, at 7:10, "Jörg Schaible" wrote:
>
>> Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All:
>>>
>>> I find that the new 'valid' method names in Validate make for odd reading.
>>>
>>> I think a verb like 'validate*' or 'check*' would be better. E
On Apr 23, 2011, at 7:10, "Jörg Schaible" wrote:
> Gary Gregory wrote:
>
>> Hi All:
>>
>> I find that the new 'valid' method names in Validate make for odd reading.
>>
>> I think a verb like 'validate*' or 'check*' would be better. Especially
>> when the Javadocs all start with 'Validates...'.
>>
Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All:
>
> I find that the new 'valid' method names in Validate make for odd reading.
>
> I think a verb like 'validate*' or 'check*' would be better. Especially
> when the Javadocs all start with 'Validates...'.
>
> I do see 'check' used in other internal APIs for this k
Hi All:
I find that the new 'valid' method names in Validate make for odd reading.
I think a verb like 'validate*' or 'check*' would be better. Especially when
the Javadocs all start with 'Validates...'.
I do see 'check' used in other internal APIs for this kind of behavior. For
example, Java Sw