tutego

2 Antwort(en) auf ›Inconsistent lower/uppercase abbreviations in Java type names‹

1. #  Thomas Zuberbuehler Januar 11, 2008 5:09 PM

   I prefer the lowercase variant because it's easier to read within a lot of class names. For example NtpUdpClient is more readable than NTPUDPClient. But I think it's a matter of taste and only important in a project with more than one developer.  

2. #  Mike Kaufman Januar 11, 2008 10:44 PM

   The inconsistency is a pain but kind of inevitable. There are just so very many abbreviations, and some just look wrong done one way or the other (sometimes depending on previous or next word). Then there's also sometimes a more general non-Java accepted practice for a particular abbreviation, so it looks wrong if done the other way. Lots of people, lots of APIs, it won't be done the same.
   
   I tend to agree that lowercase is usually clearer and a bit easier to use consistently. But then you have the Servlet API where method names using "Url" have been officially deprecated and replaced by ones with "URL" - in the name of a supposed convention to now use the upper-case form. Though it's still all "Http...".
   
   But the one that really, really annoys me is where JNDI "URL context factory" classes have to have names that start with the lower-case protocol name (e.g. "httpURLContextFactory" - hey look, both conventions in the same name!). And I vaguely think there are one or two other such APIs that enforce this kind of convention as part of how they "find" classes. It completely contradicts the platform's overall normal conventions, looks silly amongst a pile of other classes, and of course is reported by code-checking tools as obviously a mistake...