Re: new/update form patterns
Re: new/update form patterns
- Subject: Re: new/update form patterns
- From: Chuck Hill <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 13:16:05 -0700
On May 26, 2005, at 1:07 PM, Ondra Cada wrote:
While I'm soliciting methodologies, I'm curious how many of you use
the ObjC/WO naming for accessor methods vs the JavaBeans convention
(i.e. do you use "name()" or "getName()"). WO has made me very
schizophrenic wrt my get method naming. I feel urges to name them
like WO/ObjC now and I don't know who is on the dark side in this
battle :) The ObjC-style has definitely grown on me, though.
*definitely* name(). getName is ugly as hell :) (you have noticed some
bias, have you not? :)
I heartily agree. the "get" should be obvious from context, no need to
make it explicit. I find that the code is _much_ easier to read
without all those extra gets everywhere. The () are bad enough!
Anyway, I do stick with name(), even though the <censored> Java design
forces me to rename properties :)
And they call it good design!
Chuck
--
Practical WebObjects - a book for intermediate WebObjects developers
who want to increase their overall knowledge of WebObjects, or those
who are trying to solve specific application development problems.
http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden