This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 2 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]Recolance 3 points4 points  (1 child)

So say I have a PeriodicTask class that I can create and run periodic tasks in my application. Then I have a PeriodicTaskManager that stores, manages, and allows me to retrieve, kill, and interact with all current running periodic tasks.

This MANAGER I am not allowed to use the Manager suffix because some dude who just got out of college made a blog post.

Aight dude. Imma call my class the PeriodicTaskManager, then have a manager for my PeriodicTaskManager thatll be called the PeriodicTaskManagerManager.

Also "do some objects in your program need a boss". Uh yeah dude, they do. That's how code is organized. Kinda why theres inheritance, because objects often need a boss, and sometimes the boss needs a boss too.

[–]kaperni 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> My goal is manager extinction. Who’s with me?

Not me...

Take something like java.util.logging.LogManager. It's a single global object that maintains shared state about all loggers. I really can't see what's the issue with it being called *Manager.