Difference between revisions of "Persistence framework design discussion"
(→Consistency of the abstractions) |
(→Consistency of the names) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==Consistency of the names== | ==Consistency of the names== | ||
| − | The names store and retrieve, that are already used in the EiffelBase serialization cluster can be questioned. Another proposal could be to use put and item, for consistency with the structures cluster. | + | The names store and retrieve, that are already used in the EiffelBase serialization cluster can be questioned. |
| + | |||
| + | Another proposal could be to use put and item, for consistency with the structures cluster. | ||
Revision as of 01:08, 19 August 2007
Consistency of the abstractions
As there is a specific manager for binary serialization, perhaps it makes sense to move the features store, retrieve, store_handler and serializer from BINARY_FORMAT to BINARY_SERIALIZATION_MANAGER.
One reason could be cohesion within BINARY_SERIALIZATION_MANAGER.
Another reason could be that it is not clear how much the before mentioned features match with the BINARY_FORMAT abstraction.
Consistency of the names
The names store and retrieve, that are already used in the EiffelBase serialization cluster can be questioned.
Another proposal could be to use put and item, for consistency with the structures cluster.
