On Oct 7, 2011, at 11:40 AM, Sean McBride wrote: > On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 13:23:25 -0500, Charles Srstka said: > >> 1. Apple reserves the underscore prefix for their own use, so you could, >> at least theoretically, clash with a superclass ivar this way, and > > In addition to what Kyle replied, I'd just like to point out that prefixing > your *methods* with an underscore is a very bad idea, since Apple does > reserve such names and a conflict will bite you at runtime possibly affecting > the binary compatibility of your app.
Huh. I thought I’d remembered Apple having that same advice for ivars, and it turns out that they *used to* discourage starting ivars with an underscore: http://web.archive.org/web/20040816203942/http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/CodingGuidelines/Articles/NamingIvarsAndTypes.html However, this isn’t on the current version of the page. So, I stand corrected regarding Apple’s advice. However, I still think it is a good idea to use a custom prefix for ivars to avoid weird effects from your ivar accidentally getting accessed by KVO or by object_setInstanceVariable. Charles_______________________________________________ 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 arch...@mail-archive.com
