wicket-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robin Sander <robin.san...@gmx.net>
Subject Re: taking the I out of Interface
Date Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:44:16 GMT

Though I have no commit access for Wicket I want to chime in on the  
discussion:

I would vote for removing the 'I' because personally I dislike it and  
consider it a violation of Java
code conventions. But what's even more important:

! Please choose one or the other and then stick to it and enforce this  
rule if possible !
(currently it's simply a mess)

So if you follow either side of the rule, you would break  
compatibility anyway and that's why this
(otherwise strong) argument against removing the 'I' does not count in  
my opinion.
Hence it's all about personal taste and common conventions => remove  
the 'I'.

Another question because someone mentioned it in this thread and I  
asked this question myself:
why do we need an empty interface for Model? Why can't a mere String  
or any serializable POJO be
used as a model? (than this discussion about the name would end also...)

regards,

Robin.


On Oct 3, 2009, at 00:28, Igor Vaynberg wrote:

> is it perhaps time to take the I out of our interface names? wicket
> has been the only project i have ever worked on/used that follows this
> convention, is it time for a change?
>
> this is not meant as a flamewar about which convention is teh
> aw3s0m3st, simply a discussion of whether or not we should switch.
>
> -igor


Mime
View raw message