I can summarize Peter Coad's books in one word:
SHALLOW
In 1992, I was doing a comparison of different OO methdologies, and
Rumbaugh, Booch, Coad/Yourdon, Schlaer/Mellor, etc. were all big names.
Coad's book really stood out- you guessed it, for it's "shallowness".
And then it had some really questionable definition of Aggregation, not to
mention really badly chosen names for the Aggregation and Composition.
I've not read this new book, but I could immediately relate to the first few
reviewers who slammed it on Amazon.
On the issue of naming conventions, I vote against "I" :~)
And agree 100% with Eric on the usefulness of "I" in COM and no-value in
Java.
Regards,
Murali Krishna Devarakonda
----- Original Message -----
From: Erik Huddleston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: EJB naming conventions?
> OK. I was wrong. Coad only argues why "I" prefixing is better than
> ible/able/er suffixing. The interface naming section I was remembering as
> being detailed instead talks about non prefix/suffix naming issues like
> naming interfaces based on their functionality (kinds of classes, kinds of
> behaviors, object models, roles, etc). I personally don't use the "I"
> convention in Java. However in COM, I found it to be very valuable in
order
> to find out which references were to components and which references were
to
> language classes. I have not found the same utility in Java. Generally,
> the quick access to type declarations in most Java IDEs makes my only use
of
> the "I" convention worthless. So for me, Java marked the end to "I"
> interface convention and Hungarian.
>
>
> Erik
> --
>
> Erik Huddleston, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Chief Architect, eCustomers.com
> Microsoft Java MVP
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rickard �berg
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 10:44 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: EJB naming conventions?
> >
> >
> > Hey
> >
> > > Erik Huddleston wrote:
> > > As I recall, Peter Coad had a nice summary of the advantages of using
> > > the "I" prefix for interfaces in Java Design:
> > >
> > >
> > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0139111816/qid=940430526/sr
> > =1-15/002-0300451-4975441
> >
> > Could you perhaps give us a quick rundown of the main arguments?
> >
> > /Rickard
> >
> > --
> > Rickard �berg
> >
> > @home: +46 13 177937
> > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Homepage: http://www-und.ida.liu.se/~ricob684
> >
> > ==================================================================
> > =========
> > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include
> > in the body
> > of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
> >
> >
>
>
===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the
body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
>
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
