commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gilles Sadowski <>
Subject Re: [math] "Abstract" prefix?
Date Sat, 06 Aug 2011 16:16:05 GMT
On Sat, Aug 06, 2011 at 10:38:46AM +0200, S├ębastien Brisard wrote:
> Hi,
> what's your policy regarding prefixing the name of abstract classes
> with "Abstract"? I got the feeling that if there is an underlying
> interface, then you add the "abstract"
> public interface Foo{...}
> public abstract class AbstractFoo{} implements Foo
> How about abstract classes which do not implement an interface? Should
> we call them Foo or AbstractFoo. Example: should RealLinearOperator
> really be called AbstractRealLinearOperator?

No; we assumed that there won't be an interface if it can be avoided.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message