directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Karasulu" <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [New Entry API] Name for classes
Date Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:03:08 GMT
Yeap sounds good and like what we discussed.

On side note though what about the using the 'I' prefix for interfaces?
Like IFoo and IBar etc.  I personally don't like it but many projects seem
to use it.

Not trying to rehash this but I just want your input again ...

Cheers,
Alex

On Dec 15, 2007 9:31 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> sorry to rehash the question...
>
> A while back, we took a decision regarding names for interface
> implementation. We had several different names all over the code, like
> XXXImpl, BasicXXX, DefaultXXX, ConcreteXXX, BaseXXX where XXX is the
> interface name. I think we agreed on the "Default" prefix, as far as I
> can remember and find on gmail.
>
> For ServerEntry, this will give :
>
> (interface) ServerEntry
> (abstract class) AbstractServerEntry
> (class implementation) DefaultServerEntry
>
> Is that ok for everybody ?
>
> Thanks !
>
> --
> --
> cordialement, regards,
> Emmanuel L├ęcharny
> www.iktek.com
> directory.apache.org
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message