On Wed, 16 Jan 2019, at 2:42 PM, Victor Giordano wrote: > As far i can get to understand the english language (i'm not a native > speaker), the "er" seems to denotes or describe things in a more "active way" > (the thing that they actually do by itself), and the "able" describes things > in a more "passive way" (the thing that you can "ask it/his/her" to do). Do > you find this appreciation correct?
This is correct. The Go idiomatic style is to use the '-er' suffix. But this can sometimes lead to strange or obscure names even for native English speakers. For example, an interface with a "Stale() bool" method seems very strange when named as "Staler". All these sound weird: Lookuper, Errorer, Nexter My preference is for naming to be clear and understandable as I can make it. I use '-er' if it makes sense, then maybe '-able' or even something that captures something from the domain the usual ones being Logger or DataStore. All the best, Ian -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
