Re: [Springframework-developer] isXxx/getXxx for boolean properties

[Dmitriy K. <dko...@ru...>]

My 2c. I've always used isXxx() convention. +1 for isXxx()

Regards,
Dmitriy.


Rod Johnson wrote:

> Probably best to standardize on isXxx().
>
> R
>
> jürgen höller [werk3AT] wrote:
>
>> I've just noticed that we're slightly inconsistent in our naming for 
>> getters that return boolean bean properties. Most of them are called 
>> "isXxx", but 9 of them in the entire codebase are called "getXxx".
>>
>> We should find a consistent rule here. For example, should we prefer 
>> "isProxyTargetClass" or "getProxyTargetClass"? Neither is nice 
>> English, so I guess it's more about a convention then about nice 
>> method names.
>>
>> I tend to prefer the "isXxx" versions for all boolean properties. 
>> That would also be easier in terms of affected classes, as we just 
>> have 9 accessors that do not conform to that rule (i.e. 9 to be 
>> deprecated).
>>
>> On the other hand, "getXxx" might result in slightly nicer English in 
>> some boolean cases...
>>
>> Opinions?
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
> Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
> Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out 
> more
> http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> Springframework-developer mailing list
> Spr...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer