consistent methods for classes() and methods()

[destan]

classes().that().haveSimpleNameStartingWith() is available but methods().that().haveSimpleNameStartingWith() is not.

we need to use methods().that().haveNameMatching()

wouldn't it be nice to have the methods of classes() and methods() as consistent as possible? or is there a specific reason not to?

[codecholeric]

Ay, sorry for getting back so late! The reason here was, that ArchUnit is aligned closely with the Java Reflection API to be familiar to Java developers. So there is Class.getSimpleName(), but there is no Method.getSimpleName(). Inconsistencies are mainly taken over from the Java Reflection API, but I think it's worth it in general.
From an ArchUnit point of view, it should maybe be JavaClass.getFullName() for the FQN, JavaClass.getName() for the simple name, and the same for methods, but due to the decision to be consistent to the Reflection API, that's not how it is at the moment.
To be consistent with the current API, we could extend members()...haveName{startingWith,containing,endingWith}(..) similar to classes() with the simple name.

[codecholeric]

If anybody wants a good starter task 😉, it would be nice to extend the fluent API (i.e. MembersThat and MembersShould) with methods

• members().that().haveNameStartingWith(..)
• members().that().haveNameContaining(..)
• members().that().haveNameEndingWith(..)
• members().should().haveNameStartingWith(..)
• members().should().haveNameContaining(..)
• members().should().haveNameEndingWith(..)