directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Emmanuel Lecharny <>
Subject Re: [Studio] Name for classes, was: [New Entry API] Name for classes
Date Wed, 02 Jan 2008 22:08:42 GMT
Felix Knecht wrote:
> Stefan Seelmann schrieb:
>> Hi,
>> in Studio we currently use all kind of naming schema
>> - sometimes the "I" prefix for interfaces, I choosed it because it is
>> used in the Eclispe API
>> - sometimes the Default prefix for implementations
>> - sometimes the Impl suffix for classed
>> - ...
>> I think we should also use a common naming schema and I would suggest to
>> use the server's naming schema:
>>>     >     >     (interface) ServerEntry
>>>     >     >     (abstract class) AbstractServerEntry
>>>     >     >     (class implementation) DefaultServerEntry
>> We don't need to rename all interfaces and classes immediately, but if
>> we refactor one or create a new one we should follow this convention.
>> WDYT?
> Look @ The last changes are older
than one year, but nevertheless
> it's still valid and above fits quite good. Only DefaultServerEntry should be named DefaultServerEntryImpl
(I hope the
> lowercase i of impl is a typo).
The 'i' is a typo.

Basically, the 'spirit' was :

ServerEntry : interface
AbstractServerEntry : abstract class
ServerEntryImpl (or DefaultServerEntry) : we have both... Around 80 
classes each in the server !

So at some point, we didn't decided what we should use, and we still 
have to update the coding-standards document ...

I personnaly prefer ServerEntryImpl, but other dislike it very much. 
Regarding the interfaces and abstract classes, there is a kind of 
majority for what we current have.
> What is missing on the wiki page from my POV are some generic formatting rules about
Yes. The rules we are following is pretty much what we see in the XML 
field : 2 spaces indentation, the rest is up to you... But this may be 
the perfect opportunity to add some more rules to the doco !

Thanks guys !
> Felix

cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel L├ęcharny

View raw message