Rename extensions with the Extensions suffix (deprecated old, added new)

[nmetulev]

Issue: #1561

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

[x] Code style update (formatting)
[x] Refactoring 

PR Checklist

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

• Tested code with current supported SDKs
• Docs have been added/updated which fit documentation template. (for bug fixes / features)
• Sample in sample app has been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)

What is the new behavior?

The following extensions have been renamed

• ListViewBase -> ListViewExtensions (in addition, the class has been marked static)
• Hyperlink -> HyperlinkExtensions
• ApplicationView -> ApplicationViewExtensions
• StatusBar -> StatusBarExtensions
• TitleBar -> TitleBarExtensions
• WebView -> WebViewExtensions
• VisualEx -> VisualExtensions

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

[ ] Yes
[x] No - yet (it will in 3.0 when old classes are removed)

[michael-hawker]

Looks like some files were removed and added vs. moved with git mv? Or is it just GitHub not showing it?

Also, it could be useful to preserve the history for the new copies, but that involves more work (from Robert's answer here):

You can force Git to detect the history of the copied file:
- Instead of copying, switch to a new branch and move the file to its new location there.
- Switch to the original branch and rename the file.
- Merge the new branch into the original branch, resolving the trivial conflict by keeping both files.
- Restore the original filename in a separate commit.
(Solution taken from https://stackoverflow.com/a/44036771/1389680.)

[skendrot]

Shouldn't this be part of the 3.0 release?

[nmetulev]

@michael-hawker, you absolutely correct. There are two files that git didn't pick up as moved (and I didn't use git mv). It's the HyperlinkExtensions and ListViewExtensions docs.

@skendrot, this work is to prepare for removing the deprecated extensions in 3.0. I deprecated the existing extensions (but not removed) and created copies with the new name.

[skendrot]

Well that's what happens when you speak without actually looking at the diff!!

[michael-hawker]

I assume ImageEx stays the same as it's not an extension of image?

[nmetulev]

@michael-hawker, correct, it's a control

[shenchauhan]

Just a single question on the unwiring of an event. Otherwise it looks good.

[shenchauhan]

you have already done this on line 606. Am I missing something?

[nmetulev]

Good catch, fixed

[windowstoolkitbot]

This PR is linked to unclosed issues. Please check if one of these issues should be closed: #1561