John Ralls <jra...@ceridwen.us> writes:
[snip]
> Since we want to make the API useful outside of GnuCash we should declare a
> namespace to wrap everything in, maybe Gnc. That way an application that
> wants to extend our Account class could still call their child class Account,
> like so:
> class Account : public Gnc::Account;
> We'd stick
> using namespace Gnc;
> in all of our implementation files so we don't have to write
> Gnc::Account* acct = new Gnc::Account (book);
>
> So the question becomes:
> * Is Gnc OK for the namespace name?
Personally I prefer spelled out namespaces, so I would prefer "GnuCash"
instead of "Gnc" or "GNC".
> * Do we want to use camel-case or underscore-separated function and variable
> names?
My personal preference is CamelCase, where the first letter is capital
for types and classes, and the first letter is lower case for methods.
E.g.:
namespace GnuCash {
class Account {
setName(..);
};
};
As for class members, I do not have a strong opinion about whether or
not to use m_<name>.
Nor do I specifically have a preference about getter/setter names. I
definitely like setFoo(), but I don't know whether I prefer getFoo() or
foo() as the getter. I think I have a slight preference to getFoo().
> N.B. The C++ code above mirrors the old C code to emphasize the different
> naming and calling conventions. The actual C++ code will be somewhat
> different.
>
> Regards,
> John Ralls
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
warl...@mit.edu PGP key available
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
