#364 Capturing more information in the method registry

On 2012-07-03 04:24, mike amundsen wrote:
> +1 on listing idempotent. this is _critical_ in assessing the use/impact
> of a method. I'm not clear why it's left off the listing.
> ...

Anything in the registry beyond the pointer to the defining 
specification is just a shortcut; just because it's not in the registry 
doesn't mean it's not there.

Adding new fields is possible, but we need find a balance; also, it 
requires deciding on the value for all methods in the list, which also 
doesn't come at zero cost :-)

Best regards, Julian

Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2012 07:29:15 UTC