On 11.7.2008, at 04:59, William Xu wrote:
Jens Alfke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
With any naming convention, the possible problem is a conflict with
a name in a
superclass. Apple's Cocoa frameworks tend to use a "_" prefix for
both ivars
and private method names.
How about using "_" as postfix then? Like `this_one_'. I find google
c++ guide suggests that:
http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.xml#Variable_Names
Looks good to me.
The only disadvantage of this approach is that KVC’s direct access to
your ivars_ will no longer work. KVC knows about the _ivar convention
(because it is used by Apple ;-) ) and matches an _ivar to the key
"ivar". It won’t for ivar_. But than again it is better anyway to have
explicit accessors, I’d say.
Kai
PS and OT: _ivar is not (any more) considered portable C++ either
because all names beginning with _ are reserved for compiler/library
use by the standard.
--
William
http://williamxu.net9.org
... I think I'd better go back to my DESK and toy with a few common
MISAPPREHENSIONS ...
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/kai%40granus.net
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
