Comments on: Messaging semantics: names and verbs

By: Messaging Semantics: Ownership | Jimmy Bogard's Blog

Messaging Semantics: Ownership | Jimmy Bogard's Blog — Thu, 20 Dec 2012 15:51:47 +0000

[...] the last post, I covered naming of messages for the different kinds of messages we typically [...]

By: James Nail

James Nail — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 22:40:00 +0000

Jimmy, how about semantics for naming event handlers? Specifically, I’m thinking about handlers for cross-cutting concerns like security logging, change auditing, etc.

By: Lev Gorodinski

Lev Gorodinski — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 21:59:00 +0000

Yeah, this is a tough one! I have been going with the query suffix to emphasize distinction from a traditional command which can have different processing characteristics – queries are rpc, commands can be async.

By: jbogard

jbogard — Mon, 10 Dec 2012 14:28:00 +0000

Good question! I’ve gone back and forth on this myself. Sometimes I like GetPreferredCustomers, and other times PreferredCustomersQuery. I haven’t found one to be particularly better than the other, which probably explains my inability to just pick one over the other

By: Lev Gorodinski

Lev Gorodinski — Sun, 09 Dec 2012 22:52:00 +0000

What semantics do you use for queries? Something like: {Get}PreferredCustomers would be inline with the idea that queries are commands. Or, PreferredCustomers{Query} which would highlight the fact that it is a query, which can be an important distinction from what a command alone is.

By: Distributed Weekly 184 — Scott Banwart's Blog

Distributed Weekly 184 — Scott Banwart's Blog — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 08:48:20 +0000

[...] Messaging semantics: names and verbs [...]

By: The Morning Brew - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #1248

The Morning Brew - Chris Alcock » The Morning Brew #1248 — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 09:54:40 +0000

[...] Messaging semantics: names and verbs – Jimmy Bogard discusses a naming convention for Message names in message passing systems, and ensuring that the names are consistent with what the message does. [...]