IBM folks do the same, they put an uppercase i in front of interface names.
On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 11:02 +0300, Ersin Er wrote:
> It seems that we do not have a consistent naming convention for
> interfaces and their implementor classes. For example, when the
> interface is named Foo, we may have implementor classes named like
> FooImpl, BaseFoo, DefaultFoo, etc.
> Which one do you think is correct (or makes sense the most)?
well, that's a good question... Personnaly, I like to add a I to
interface names (IFoo), but this is a kind of M$ hungarylish footprint.
So FooImpl seems to be the best solution to me, but that's just my own