Comments on: Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/ A Grande, Triple Shot, Non-Fat Core Dump by Russell Ball Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:00:00 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: The Week in Code (XII) « Sgt. Conker http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/comment-page-1/#comment-2455 The Week in Code (XII) « Sgt. Conker Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:06:41 +0000 http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/?p=662#comment-2455 [...] Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? Russell Ball about dropping the I of the interface names and annotate the implementations with an Impl suffix instead. The first two comments pretty much sum up my current thoughts on this. [...] [...] Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? Russell Ball about dropping the I of the interface names and annotate the implementations with an Impl suffix instead. The first two comments pretty much sum up my current thoughts on this. [...]

]]> By: Weekly Links #70 | GrantPalin.com http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/comment-page-1/#comment-2265 Weekly Links #70 | GrantPalin.com Mon, 14 Sep 2009 01:04:01 +0000 http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/?p=662#comment-2265 [...] Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? Discussion on using a different technique for naming interfaces, rather than the typical ISomething. [...] [...] Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? Discussion on using a different technique for naming interfaces, rather than the typical ISomething. [...]

]]> By: Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? | Caffeinated … interface http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/comment-page-1/#comment-2262 Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? | Caffeinated … interface Sat, 12 Sep 2009 12:10:18 +0000 http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/?p=662#comment-2262 [...] See original here: Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? | Caffeinated … [...] [...] See original here: Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? | Caffeinated … [...]

]]> By: T. Moriarty http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/comment-page-1/#comment-2258 T. Moriarty Fri, 11 Sep 2009 18:25:25 +0000 http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/?p=662#comment-2258 If you are still using the JLam color scheme, interfaces and structs have the same color. Personally, I don't mind the I prefix. But at the same time, I experiment with different naming conventions and styles. Ulitmately, what is important is that your organization has a standard. If you are still using the JLam color scheme, interfaces and structs have the same color. Personally, I don’t mind the I prefix. But at the same time, I experiment with different naming conventions and styles. Ulitmately, what is important is that your organization has a standard.

]]> By: Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? | Caffeinated … kukuge http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/comment-page-1/#comment-2257 Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? | Caffeinated … kukuge Fri, 11 Sep 2009 18:22:27 +0000 http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/?p=662#comment-2257 [...] Originally posted here:  Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? | Caffeinated … [...] [...] Originally posted here:  Should We Change the Way We Name Interfaces in .NET? | Caffeinated … [...]

]]> By: Lee Brandt http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/comment-page-1/#comment-2256 Lee Brandt Fri, 11 Sep 2009 16:42:35 +0000 http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/?p=662#comment-2256 I am a fan of killing the sacred ICow and just calling it Cow and having DefaultCow, JerseyCow and MexicaqnCow. I read something about this last year and thought it would be nice, but didn't try and introduce it to my team. IInterface naming is a developer "woobie" that they're definitely not ready to give up yet. I also read some one saying if you must use "I" as a prefixe try making it a pronoun IManageCache, IAuthorizeUsers. Still would like to drop the "I" altogether. ~Lee I am a fan of killing the sacred ICow and just calling it Cow and having DefaultCow, JerseyCow and MexicaqnCow. I read something about this last year and thought it would be nice, but didn’t try and introduce it to my team. IInterface naming is a developer “woobie” that they’re definitely not ready to give up yet. I also read some one saying if you must use “I” as a prefixe try making it a pronoun IManageCache, IAuthorizeUsers. Still would like to drop the “I” altogether.

~Lee

]]> By: Robz http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/comment-page-1/#comment-2252 Robz Thu, 10 Sep 2009 18:56:58 +0000 http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/?p=662#comment-2252 I'm a little bit of a fan of chainsaw naming conventions... :D I’m a little bit of a fan of chainsaw naming conventions… :D

]]> By: Russell Ball http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/comment-page-1/#comment-2251 Russell Ball Thu, 10 Sep 2009 18:25:04 +0000 http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/?p=662#comment-2251 @Robz - Yeah, the lowercase & underscore convention comes from Ruby, so I have had a chance to use that one on a project before this class. I do actually think it is more readable, but I thought I would practice SRP on my post and not mix topics. I also think that the vast majority of .NET developers would put up even more resistance to that one. Perhaps that can be the next post though... @Robz – Yeah, the lowercase & underscore convention comes from Ruby, so I have had a chance to use that one on a project before this class. I do actually think it is more readable, but I thought I would practice SRP on my post and not mix topics. I also think that the vast majority of .NET developers would put up even more resistance to that one. Perhaps that can be the next post though…

]]> By: Robz http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/comment-page-1/#comment-2250 Robz Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:59:32 +0000 http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/?p=662#comment-2250 Well now that we are talking about naming conventions, how about a convention where the only PascalCase is Class and Interface names? Everything, and I mean everything else is lowercase (including properties, methods, variables, and even namespaces). Namespaces have no underscores. Variables, parameters, properties, and methods all have a casing similar to "get_the_trades". All lowercase with "_" (underscores) between words. http://bombali.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/product/bombali/infrastructure/timers/DefaultTimer.cs Well now that we are talking about naming conventions, how about a convention where the only PascalCase is Class and Interface names? Everything, and I mean everything else is lowercase (including properties, methods, variables, and even namespaces). Namespaces have no underscores.

Variables, parameters, properties, and methods all have a casing similar to “get_the_trades”. All lowercase with “_” (underscores) between words.

http://bombali.googlecode.com/.....ltTimer.cs

]]> By: Sohan http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/should-we-change-the-way-we-name-interfaces-in-net/comment-page-1/#comment-2249 Sohan Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:40:25 +0000 http://www.caffeinatedcoder.com/?p=662#comment-2249 Another good idea is to use the 'able' postfix like a serializable, stackable and so forth. Another good idea is to use the ‘able’ postfix like a serializable, stackable and so forth.

]]>