Kulla: API naming question JLS vs JVM class

[Remi Forax]

<bikesheding on>
We are talking about an enum value, so the name is not TYPE_DECL but 
KeyKind.TYPE_DECL,
the result is a name with a prefix component and a postfix component,
i find these kind of name hard to read.

but if KeyKind is mostly use with an import static, i'm fine with TYPE_DECL.

cheers,
Rémi

On 06/21/2015 10:45 PM, Robert Field wrote:
> Two off lists responses --
>
> -------------------------
>
> I vote for: TYPE_DECL, VAR_DECL, METHOD_DECL.
>
> -------------------------
>
> "Type" usually references to a type not a declaration. Variable 
> similarly.  And their Keys subclass off DeclarationKey. So, a _DECL 
> suffix makes sense.
>
> -------------------------
>
> -R
>
>
> On 06/20/15 19:19, Robert Field wrote:
>> Keys for what is called a "class" in the JVM (that is a class, enum, 
>> interface, or annotation interface in JLS speak) have Key.Kind.CLASS 
>> and are instances of Key.ClassKey.
>>
>> This is awkward both in terms of documenting them (I'm referencing 
>> the JLS) and because the SubKind values are JLS-speak:
>>
>>     CLASS_SUBKIND(Key.Kind.CLASS),
>>     INTERFACE_SUBKIND(Key.Kind.CLASS),
>>     ENUM_SUBKIND(Key.Kind.CLASS),
>>     ANNOTATION_TYPE_SUBKIND(Key.Kind.CLASS),
>>
>> Looking at the JLS the syntax production is TypeDeclaration. So, I 
>> think the Key.Kind should be changed to TYPE.
>>
>> It could be changed to TYPE_DECLARATION but then we would want to 
>> also change VARIABLE and METHOD to
>>
>>    VARIABLE_DECLARATION
>>    METHOD_DECLARATION
>>
>> Which would make use pretty verbose.  Could be abbreviated, but the 
>> API currently mostly shies away from abbreviations.
>>
>> So, the choices are:
>>
>> (1)   TYPE   TypeKey
>>
>> (2)   TYPE_DECLARATION   TypeDeclarationKey
>>
>> (3)    TYPE_DECL   TypeDeclKey
>>
>> (4)    CLASS   ClassKey
>>
>> What do you all think?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robert
>>
>