Need suggestion about the name of the class [on hold]

Question

There is some object say, ABC, which I get in different ways. I have added all these methods to get the object ABC in a separate class. Now my question is how should I name this class? I have named it ABCHelper which I know is not an appropriate name. I also don't want to name it util, else I have to keep static methods which I want to avoid. Could you please suggest me any appropriate name for such class.

public class ABCHelper {

    public List<ABC> getABC(Source1 source1, ParameterType1 parameter1) {
        // There are more lines of code here. 
        // Showing only this much for simplicity.
        return source1.getABC(source1, method1);  
    }

    public List<ABC> getABC(Source1 source1, ParameterType2 parameter2) {
        return source1.getABC(source1, method1);
    }

    public List<ABC> getABC(Source2 source1, ParameterType3 parameter3) {
        return source1.getABC(source1, method1);
    }

    public List<ABC> getABC(Source2 source1, ParameterType4 parameter4) {
        return source1.getABC(source1, method1);
    }
}

Answer 1

I have added all these methods to get the object ABC in a separate class.

It's a good case for defining static factory methods within the class ABC. Along with giving these methods meaningful names (e.g. ABC.getFromSource1), it's the first option I would suggest you consider.

Could you please suggest me any appropriate name for such class.

Define a single responsibility that your class will be taking. Choose the right noun for that role. It might be Initialiser, Creator, Producer, Supplier, etc.

Answer 2

Welcome to StackOverflow. This is not a naming issue, but the design issue. Try to avoid names like *Helper and *Utils. I suggest you create a class extending ArrayList<ABC> which would have constructors of this class would accept those parameters. The constructor of inherited class accepts another collection (public ArrayList(Collection<? extends E> c)) which is useful in case the method getABC returns List<ABC> which is a Collection itself.

public class AbcList extends ArrayList<ABC> {

    public AbcList(Source1 source1, ParameterType1 parameter1) {
        super(source1.getABC(source1, method1));
    }

    public AbcList(Source1 source1, ParameterType2 parameter2) {
        super(source1.getABC(source1, method2));
    }

    // ...
}

---

If you insist to use a class with a bunch of static methods, I suggest you the Factory design pattern which implies the possible names of the class:

• public class AbcFactory
• public class AbcListFactory

Answer 3

You can try naming it *Provider if it suits your requirement. I.e if your class is used to provide manipulated list from source then you can do it like : DataModel is your any source class then use it as,

public class DataModelProvider {

public List<Data> getData(Source1 source1, ParameterType1 parameter1) {
    // There are more lines of code here. 
    // Showing only this much for simplicity.
    return source1.getData(source1, method1);  
}

public List<Data> getData(Source1 source1, ParameterType2 parameter2) {
    return source1.getData(source1, method1);
}

public List<Data> getData(Source2 source1, ParameterType3 parameter3) {
    return source1.getData(source1, method1);
}

public List<Data> getData(Source2 source1, ParameterType4 parameter4) {
    return source1.getData(source1, method1);
}}

Even though, you can try some suffix for your class like Dto, Entity, Bean etc. based on your structure. (More like code design pattern)