Timeline for Interface naming: prefix 'Can-' vs suffix '-Able'
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 26, 2012 at 9:45 | comment | added | Danny Varod | I only recall using adjective phrases for mock classes implementing interfaces for unit tests - since they had no real role. | |
| Jan 26, 2012 at 9:17 | comment | added | axel22 |
One example in the Scala language is the CanBuildFrom. This would be an adjective phrase. The use-case of this class is very different than that of other classes. Instances of this class are almost never constructed nor resolved by the client - rather, they are available in the scope for certain types. If they are available for a certain type, then methods involving that type which are marked to require this typeclass can be called. This exists to offer an extensibility mechanism more flexible than subtyping. See scala-lang.org/node/114.
|
|
| Jan 25, 2012 at 23:59 | comment | added | Danny Varod | Can* is not a good name for a class. Quote from MSDN: "Do name classes, interfaces, and value types with nouns, noun phrases, or occasionally adjective phrases, using Pascal casing", link: msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms229040.aspx Good name for class would be Document, acceptable name would be Printable. | |
| Jan 25, 2012 at 10:04 | history | answered | axel22 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |