I leaving you to name it properly ;)


2009/12/23 Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>:
> On 23.12.2009, at 15:13, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>
>> 2009/12/23 Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>:
>>> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There is a basic class, BasicSourceCodeManager
>>>> which declares protocol, so you can make a subclass of it. Also, it
>>>> doesn't forcing you to use sourcePointer to be only integer values.
>>>
>>> Do us all a favor and do NOT name classes "Basic" or "Abstract" or "Pure".
>>> Such names show utter lack of understanding of the problem domain. Being
>>> abstract follows from the abstract concept represented (Behavior, Number,
>>> Collection, String) and concrete entities have more concrete names (Class,
>>> LargePositiveInteger, WeakSet, ByteString).
>>>
>>
>> okay, is SourceCodeManager name abstract enuf for you ? :)
>
> "Manager" is not really descriptive either ;)
>
> I'm trying to remember where I read about how to name classes. Maybe it's one of Kent's Best Practice patterns.
>
> - Bert -
>
>
>
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.