ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Thomas Christen" <...@active.ch>
Subject AW: [PATCH] Wait and Available
Date Mon, 27 Nov 2000 17:45:02 GMT
> The use of the prefix "I" for interfaces is not idiomatic to Java
> (according to JLS) (rather one should use the suffix Impl for
> implementation if needed to separate them both).
I or not I seams to be the question? Before reading the book "java 2
performance and idiom guide" writen by Craig Larman and Rhett Guthrie, I
thoght the same way as you do. They say : "Many developers are moving to the
I-convention because it instantly communicates the fact that the code
construct is an interface. This is important because interfaces are the
prefered way of specifying APIs and abstractions. Because of this, we
recommend beginning intrafce names with I.". I don't argue about this idiom
but since we began using it, even in large Java-projects, the conceptual
model becam clearer and readable.

> I don't see it anywhere else in the code for Ant so I guess it's
> not project-standard for Ant either. (As with most Java-projects.)
No problem, was used to the I-convention. We can stick to the standard - if
exists at all.

Thomas


Mime
View raw message