Hi Omar. I found the root of my confusion. There are some annotations/classes that are provided by your library (e.g. CJIgnore). There are also some classes that are part of the example and need to be provided by the library user (like CJModel).
So you chose pretty abstract and similar names. It would be much more understandable if you picked completely different names for the example, that people can relate to.
For example, you could start like: „Say you‘ve got a list of products, and you want to export them to a CSV file. Each product is exported as a row.“ ...
Then you show the Product class with the the CJ... annotations. Currently, you don’t describe all the annotations- that could be improved as well.
The exported table example should match the code. Currently, you‘ve got one CJModel in the code, but to rows in the table.
Maybe there’s a better example then Product...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Hi Omar. I found the root of my confusion. There are some annotations/classes that are provided by your library (e.g. CJIgnore). There are also some classes that are part of the example and need to be provided by the library user (like CJModel).
So you chose pretty abstract and similar names. It would be much more understandable if you picked completely different names for the example, that people can relate to.
For example, you could start like: „Say you‘ve got a list of products, and you want to export them to a CSV file. Each product is exported as a row.“ ...
Then you show the Product class with the the CJ... annotations. Currently, you don’t describe all the annotations- that could be improved as well.
The exported table example should match the code. Currently, you‘ve got one CJModel in the code, but to rows in the table.
Maybe there’s a better example then Product...