On Friday 22 April 2005 12:36, Erik Hatcher wrote: > On Apr 22, 2005, at 5:53 AM, Mind Bridge wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Do you have to 'implement' or 'extend' a particular type? Can you have > > multiple inheritance with that type or not? Can you instantiate it? > > > > The answers of those questions are clear with 'IPage'. If 'Page' can > > be both a class or an interface, you have to look through the code to > > find that out. > > > > Interfaces and classes are two rather different concepts. It seems to > > me that they need to be distinguished clearly. Removing the 'I' in > > front of the name and the characters that saves are a much smaller win > > compared to the loss of clarity and the time wasted in figuring out > > what can be done with that type. > > I disagree. Putting an "I" in front of something that is declared as > an "interface" already is redundant. My IDEs (I juggle between Eclipse > and IDEA) both easily show me what kind of beast a particular reference > is if I want to know. In most cases its irrelevant whether you're > dealing with one or the other. Tapestry is the exception here - no > other API I work with uses this old-school Hungarian notation.
Erik, I just would like to mention that there is another open source project which uses the "I" prefix for interfaces : this is the Eclipse IDE. So maybe Tapestry is (was) not that old fashioned after all ;-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
