No Hungarian Notation in Smalltalk
Brent Pinkney
brent.pinkney at aircom.co.za
Tue Nov 4 16:48:22 UTC 2003
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 17:26:42 +0100, Peter van Rooijen
<peter at vanrooijen.com> wrote:
>
> IMO it is totally appropriate, and quite satisfactory, for system classes
> (which include, but don't have to be limited to, base image classes) to
> live
> in the default namespace. Thus they don't need any prefix nor suffix.
>
> It is the classes produced by others than the organizational entity that
> creates the system classes, and manages the default namespace, that need
> disambiguation.
>
Precies :)
It is precicely because Roel's System Change events are _probably_ going
to be included in the base image, that we thrash out and firmly establish
the naming convention we would like to see observed in Squeak.
As I have explained and illustrated, and you and others previously
concurred, the tradition is to avoid prefixes or suffixes.
However, disambiguation of more optional classes is a separate unrelated
issue and for that reason there already exists the Prefix Registry page on
the Swiki reserve such prefixes.
As illustrated, one of the de-facto standards is to avoid the Hungrian
convention of including implementation type in the name. So even if I have
a new Event subclass to capture the ocurrence of a flower blossoming in
package BloemStuff, its name would be BloemFlowerBlossom and not
BloemFlowerBlossomEvent or BloemEventFlowerBlossom.
By your own reasoning, were flower blossoming events to be introduced as a
core class, only the namespace prefix would dissapear, leaving
FlowerBlossom.
The Bloem prefix is cleary only for disambiguation and could be nicely
removed if better namespace support was ever introduced:
BloemFlowerBlossom new
becomes
Bloem FlowerBlossom new
q.e.d :)
Brent
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|