Client#spots should really be called Client#spots_by_coordinates

[krainboltgreene]

See: Title

[qpowell]

@krainboltgreene Good catch!

I agree that Client#spots_by_coordinates is a lot more descriptive than spots, and it's more consistent with some of the other methods. I've never given it much thought since it was already named when I inherited the project and it seemed pretty straightforward. This may just be due to the fact that it's the first thing shown in the README after creating an instance of the client.

I'm open to changing it. What are your thoughts on something like Client#spots_by_lat_lng? My reasons are:

1. I spent a few weeks dealing with GeoJSON data, where coordinates are lng/lat, so I'm wondering if "coordinates" may not be specific enough?
2. I hate typing the word coordinates 😆

@edwinwills Curious to hear your opinion on this as well.

[krainboltgreene]

I love the word coordinates, but you're right #spots_by_lat_lng is more effective signaling.

[edwinwills]

This all makes sense (and I love descriptive method names). Agree lat_lng is better - saves confusion with eastings/northings coordinate types etc. lat_lng vs lat_lon?

If we're going to shift to this style of method naming, it'd be nice to delegate and deprecate for the next minor release, and then next major release can remove the old standalone spots method.

[qpowell]

@edwinwills I might not be free until this weekend but I'll go ahead and assign it to myself. I've been looking for an excuse to write some ruby lately :)

[edwinwills]

Nice one!