Re: Interface naming standards?
| From: | Olivier Guilyardi | Date: | Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:36:01 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Interface naming standards? | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-42746@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Jan Schneider wrote:
Zitat von Patrick Müller <elias0@gmx.net>:Indeed, although it's criticized here and there, it's a wide-spread convention in Python, Perl and Java... Another option is to give a meaningful name whenever possible, as I read somewhere, using the "able" suffix. For example, in Structures_DataGrid there are "Rendering drivers", or "Renderers", which all inherits from the Structures_DataGrid_Renderer abstract class. A good interface name could then be : Structures_DataGrid_IRenderable or Structures_DataGrid_Renderable Trouble is, that wouldn't work for DataSources... Structures_DataGrid_IDataSourceable ? -- oghi, Foo_Bar_IFooBar imho this is the most common form if you want to indicate interfaces in the name. i've seen this in many languages.Agreed. It's short, comprehensive, and common for everyone working with interfaces in other languages.