[Pharo-project] a question about reef naming conventions

Peter van Rooijen peter at vanrooijen.com
Thu Nov 4 08:53:38 CET 2010

On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 00:01:24 +0100, Diogenes Moreira  
<diogenes.moreira at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think the third option is clearer than the others.

I agree, but I'd use a "real" prefix, exactly the same characters at the  
beginning, every time.

So that would become: reefAsView, reefAsCallback.

In my own code, I prefix selectors sometimes and always as real prefixes.

But I would use an abbreviation for the project/"namespace" prefix

instead of something that could be a word, so that the prefix stands out  

So that might become: rfAsView, rfAsCallback.


Best Regards

> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I'm having some doubts about how to call some methods for Reef. To be  
>> precise, I'm not sure about the naming og the method extensions I'm  
>> adding.
>> For instance, I have an extension for Object, the method #asView, and  
>> some others in BlockClosure, #asCallback, asCallbackOn:, etc.

>> So... I want to ask which naming convention is better.

>> 1) Just let the methods like now?
>> 2) adding a prefix, like reView, reCallback, etc.?
>> 3) adding a full name prefix, asReefView, asReefCallback, etc.?

>> What do you think?

>> Cheers,
>> Esteban

Peter van Rooijen
Nijlring 83
5152 VJ Drunen
m: 06-2854 2048
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/pharo-project/attachments/20101104/983e307f/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pharo-project mailing list