> >
> > I don't like the SmallTaLk convention very much. thisLooksFunny,
> > this_looks_less_funny. Amulet uses underscores, but the method names are
> > capitalized.
>
> Underscores definitely improve readability. I guess we can stick
> with the underscores.
>
Ok, so let's go with underscores.
> >
> >
> > I don't know what to do here. What can we do to stay independent of
> > particular implementations? Is there already a published proposal for what
> > the standard classes will be and what their interface will look like?
> >
> > If there is, we could build our own collection classes as wrappers of LEDA
> > classes that we want to use. We probably won't use many so this wouldn't be
> > too much work. Also, if the standard catches on, I assume the LEDA
> > implementors will come up with collection classes that use the standard
> > interface.
> >
> >
>
> We do not have access to the standards for the class libraries.
> And, when there is a standard, I am sure, LEDA will enforce it. So, we can
> use LEDA as it is. The conversion to standards can probably be done as
> necessary.
>
Ok too.
To summarize, our convention is as follows:
- Class names are capitalized, separate words separated with underscores.
- Method names are lowe case, separated with underscores.
-- get methods and set methods have the same name (overloading based on the
paramters).
We still need a convention for naming the iterators. We were using
get_xx_iter, but since get methods are not called get_xxx, the iterators
shouldn't have a get_ in front of them. Let's call the methods that return
the itererators xxx_iter, and the iterator classes Xxx_Iter.
Pedro Szekely
USC/ISI, 4676 Admiralty Way, Marina del Rey, CA 90292
Phone: 310/822-1511, Fax: 310/823-6714
URL: http://www.isi.edu/isd/HUMANOID-HOME.html