Search Results

Search found 1399 results on 56 pages for 'naming'.

Page 5/56 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • mysql naming convention

    - by Lizard
    I have generally always used some sort of Hungarian Notation for my field names in my tables e.g. #Table Users u_id, u_name, u_email etc... #Posts p_id, p_u_id, p_title, p_content etc... But I have recently been told that this isn't best practice. Is there a more standard way of doing this? I haven't really liked just using the field id as this is then requirs you to select table.field for fields names that appear in mutliple tables when using joins etc. Your thoughts on what is best practice would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Variable naming for arrays - C#

    - by David Neale
    What should I call a variable instantiated with some type of array? Is it okay to simply use a pluralised form of the type being held? IList<Person> people = new List<Person>(); or should I append something like 'List' to the name? IList<Person> personList = new List<Person>();

    Read the article

  • Naming convention when casually referring to methods in Java

    - by polygenelubricants
    Is there a Java convention to refer to methods, static and otherwise, any specific one or the whole overload, etc? e.g. String.valueOf - referring to all overloads of static valueOf String.valueOf(char) - specific overload, formal parameter name omittable? String.split - looks like a static method, but actually an instance method Maybe aString.split is the convention? String#split - I've seen this HTML anchor form too, which I guess is javadoc-influenced Is there an authoritative recommendation on how to clearly refer to these things?

    Read the article

  • Variable naming for arrays/lists/collections - C#

    - by David Neale
    What should I call a variable instantiated with some type of array? Is it okay to simply use a pluralised form of the type being held? IList<Person> people = new List<Person>(); or should I append something like 'List' to the name? IList<Person> personList = new List<Person>(); Is it generally acceptable to have loops like this? foreach(string item in items) { //Do something }

    Read the article

  • Naming Suggestions For A Function Providing Method Chaining In A Different Way

    - by sid3k
    I've coded an experimental function which makes passed objects chainable by using high order functions. It's name is "chain" for now, and here is a usage example; chain("Hello World") (print) // evaluates print function by passing "Hello World" object. (console.log,"Optional","Parameters") (returnfrom) // returns "Hello World" It looks lispy but behaves very different since it's coded in a C based language, I don't know if there is a name for this idiom and I couldn't any name more suitable than "chain". Any ideas, suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Maven: Unofficial artifact naming scheme?

    - by Sophistifunk
    I'm creating some Maven artifacts for various dependencies for our projects, and while I'm taking my best guess at group / artifact IDs, I'd like to add something to flag them as "unofficial" and created by us for compilation, so that should we find official sources for the same thing in the future there's no confusion and we can simply change to point to the identifiers. Is there a best/common/reccomended practice for doing so? I was just thinking something like setting groupId="org.providername.unofficial", but since Maven's all about "doing it our way" I just want to see if there's a precedent for something different already...

    Read the article

  • Naming Suggestions For A Function Providing Chaining In A Different Way

    - by sid3k
    I've coded an experimental function which makes passed objects chainable by using high order functions. It's name is "chain" for now, and here is a usage example; chain("Hello World") (print) // evaluates print function by passing "Hello World" object. (console.log,"Optional","Parameters") (returnfrom) // returns "Hello World" It looks lispy but behaves very different since it's coded in a C based language, I don't know if there is a name for this idiom and I couldn't any name more suitable than "chain". Any ideas, suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Naming convention for utility classes in Java

    - by Zarjay
    When writing utility classes in Java, what are some good guidelines to follow? Should packges be "util" or "utils"? Is it ClassUtil or ClassUtils? When is a class a "Helper" or a "Utility"? Utility or Utilities? Or do you use a mixture of them? The standard Java library uses both Utils and Utilities: javax.swing.Utilities javax.print.attribute.AttributeSetUtilities javax.swing.plaf.basic.BasicGraphicsUtils Apache uses a variety of Util and Utils, although mostly Utils: org.apache.commons.modeler.util.DomUtil org.apache.commons.modeler.util.IntrospectionUtils org.apache.commons.io.FileSystemUtils org.apache.lucene.wordnet.AnalyzerUtil org.apache.lucene.util.ArrayUtil org.apache.lucene.xmlparser.DOMUtils Spring uses a lot of Helper and Utils classes: org.springframework.web.util.UrlPathHelper org.springframework.core.ReflectiveVisitorHelper org.springframework.core.NestedExceptionUtils org.springframework.util.NumberUtils So, how do you name your utility classes?

    Read the article

  • URL naming conventions

    - by LookitsPuck
    So, this may be a can of worms. But I'm curious what your practices are? For example, let's say your website consists of the following needs (very basic): A landing page An information page for an event (static) A listing of places for that event (dynamic) An information page for each place With that said, how would you design your URLs? Typically, I'd do something like the following: www.domain.com/ - landing page [also accessible via www.domain.com/home] www.domain.com/event - event information page www.domain.com/places - listing of all places www.domain.com/places/{id} - place information page Now, here's a question. Just grammatically speaking, I have a hangup of referring to a given place in a url as being plural. Shouldn't it make more sense to go with this: www.domain.com/place/{id} as opposed to www.domain.com/places/{id} In some frameworks, you have a convention to follow (for example, ASP.NET MVC) by default. Yes, you can define custom routes to have /place/{id} route to the PlacesController. However, I'm just trying to keep this a bit abstract in discussion. With that being said, let's see for instance on another page of your site, you have a link, that when clicked, would open a modal popup populated with place information. Where you place that information? We could go with something like this: www.domain.com/ajax/places/{id} OR www.domain.com/places/{id} and serve based on the request header (that is, if requesting JSON, return JSON?}. Finally, for SEO reasons, typically I use a slug associated with a given resource. So, something like such: www.domain.com/ajax/places/{id}/london Where london is only there to add decoration to the link for SEO reasons. Is this sound? I ask all of these questions, because these are practices that I've been using for awhile, and I'd just like to see what other developers are doing or if I'm approaching things incorrectly. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Java Interfaces/Implementation naming convention

    - by Amir Rachum
    How do you name different classes / interfaces you create? Sometimes I don't have implementation information to add to the implementation name - like interface FileHandler and class SqlFileHandler. hen this happens I usually name the interface in the "normal" name, like Truck and name the actual class TruckClass. How do you name interfaces and classes in this regard?

    Read the article

  • domain modeling naming problem

    - by cherouvim
    Hello There are some simple entities in an application (e.g containing only id and title) which rarely change and are being referenced by the more complex entities of the application. These are usually entities such as Country, City, Language etc. How are these called? I've used the following names for those in the past but I'm not sure which is the best way to call them: reference data lookup values dictionaries thanks

    Read the article

  • Problem Naming an Interface

    - by Jens Schauder
    I have an interface named PropertyFilter which used to take a Propertyand decide if accepts it or not. And the world was good. But now the interface changed, so that implementations may choose to add additional Propertys. For example a Customer property might get expanded into Name and Address properties. I think it is obvious this is not a Filter anymore, but how would you call such a thing?

    Read the article

  • Naming conventions for complex getters in Java

    - by Simon
    Hi there! I was reading this C# article about the usage of properties and methods. It points out why and when to use properties or methods. Properties are meant to be used like fields, meaning that properties should not be computationally complex or produce side effects I was asking myself how you could express this difference in Java, where you only use getters for the retrieval of data. What is your opinion?

    Read the article

  • Table Naming Dilemma: Singular vs. Plural Names

    - by ProfK
    Convention has it that table names should be the singular of the entity that they store attributes of. I dislike any T-SQL that requires square brackets around names, but I have renamed a Users table to the singular, forever sentencing those using the table to sometimes have to use brackets. My gut feel is that it is more correct to stay with the singular, but my gut feel is also that brackets indicate undesirables like column names with spaces in them etc. Should I stay, or should I go?

    Read the article

  • python: naming a module that has a two-word name

    - by Jason S
    I'm trying to put together a really simple module with one .py source file in it, and have already run into a roadblock. I was going to call it scons-config but import scons-config doesn't work in Python. I found this SO question and looked at PEP8 style guide but am kind of bewildered, it doesn't talk about two-word-name conventions. What's the right way to deal with this? module name: SconsConfig? scons_config? sconsconfig? scons.config? name of the single .py file in it: scons-config.py? scons_config.py?

    Read the article

  • Function naming: sendCharacter or receiveCharacter?

    - by bobobobo
    I'm trying to name a function that runs when a character is received by the object. For the caller, it should be named sendCharacter, so that it can call: object->sendCharacter( character ) ; That looks nice for the caller.. but for the receiver, it implements a method /// Called when this object is do something /// with a character /// from the caller void sendCharacter( char c ) ; So for the recipient class, it looks like this method will actually send a character out, not receive one. So then, I could call the function receiveCharacter /// Called when this object is do something /// with a character /// from the caller void receiveCharacter( char c ) ; But now the caller does this: object->receiveCharacter( character ) ; Which just looks odd. How can I better name this function?

    Read the article

  • Interface naming convention

    - by Frederick
    This is a subjective thing of course, but I don't see anything positive in prefixing interface names with an 'I'. To me, Thing is practically always more readable than IThing. My question is, why does this convention exist then? Sure, it makes it easier to tell interfaces from other types. But wouldn't that argument extend to retaining the Hungarian notation, which is now widely censured? What's your argument for that awkward 'I'? Or, more importantly, what could be Microsoft's?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >