ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Loughran" <>
Subject Re: [PATCH] Wait and Available
Date Tue, 28 Nov 2000 00:46:04 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Conor MacNeill" <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 14:03
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Wait and Available

> Thomas, I do not like the "I" convention, myself. In general, I do not
> embedding type information into names as types can be changed and get out
> sync with the name. Indeed, interfaces often start life as abstract

type is bad -it is brittle and the compiler usually handles type safety
anyway. functionality is a different case. Does the 'I' specify type or

I think it just boils down to a style issue: the I prefix is certainly
windows/COM style, but that's a world where we use C in front of classes and
m_ ahead of methods. Even the C# language has abandoned those concepts.

I tend to use ISomething, except when I use the SomethingIntf style instead.
Who knows which is better?

> A classic example of this problem from Windows is the wParam member of the
> Windows message which is not a word but a long in Win32 :-)

It becomes a 64 bit 'word param' on win64...


View raw message