beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eddie ONeil <ekon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: checkstyle and code conventions
Date Wed, 08 Jun 2005 12:51:11 GMT
  The "I" naming convention is applied to only Java interfaces like:

  public interface IFoo {...}

It's not meant to be used on abstract base classes -- which aren't
interfaces -- just an API.

  It's really meant to make very obvious in code what is and is not an
interface without having to consult the Javadoc.

  It's a convention both Daryl and I used a bunch, but I'm not wedded
to it and would be fine if we agreed to move away from it.  Doesn't
seem that common in Java land anyway...

Eddie


On 6/8/05, Jeremiah Johnson <jerjohns@bea.com> wrote:
> > [9] We name interfaces with a 'I' at the beginning of them...
> 
> Is this point about Java interfaces or conceptual interfaces?
> 
> For example, PageFlowConstants is a Java interface, but not really an
> 'interface' in my opinion.  While constants inside of PageFlowConstants
> may be part of the API between two entities, the PageFlowConstants file
> itself does not define any methods so it isn't really an API between two
> entities.
> 
> On the other hand, SQLSupportConfig does fit my definition of interface
> but it isn't a 'Java interface'.  It is defined as 'public abstract
> class SQLSupportConfig'.
> 
> Or does something need to be a Java interface and be externally visible
> to be a big-I interface?
> 
> Something else?
> 
> - jeremiah
> 
>

Mime
View raw message