[math] "Abstract" prefix?

[Sébastien Brisard]

Hi,
what's your policy regarding prefixing the name of abstract classes
with "Abstract"? I got the feeling that if there is an underlying
interface, then you add the "abstract"
public interface Foo{...}
public abstract class AbstractFoo{} implements Foo

How about abstract classes which do not implement an interface? Should
we call them Foo or AbstractFoo. Example: should RealLinearOperator
really be called AbstractRealLinearOperator?
Thanks,
S

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org