We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
This will encourage libraries to conform to standard guidelines for behavior and method naming.
The sixpack A/B testing framework does this well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
ZeroMQ did this as well. Very effective. See their guidelines too: http://www.zeromq.org/docs:bindings
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Matthew Hudson [email protected]:
This will encourage libraries to conform to standard guidelines for behavior and method naming. The sixpackhttps://github.com/seatgeek/sixpack/blob/master/CLIENTSPEC.mdA/B testing framework does this well. — Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/13 .
The sixpackhttps://github.com/seatgeek/sixpack/blob/master/CLIENTSPEC.mdA/B testing framework does this well.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/13 .
Jeff Lindsay http://progrium.com
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
This will encourage libraries to conform to standard guidelines for behavior and method naming.
The sixpack A/B testing framework does this well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: