|
From: Ian R. C. <ir...@ho...> - 2002-02-18 01:31:07
|
My 2 cents ... 1. I agree (a) yes (b) I prefer pascal-casing for public members and camel-casing for private members (c) I vote for a prefixed "_" without the "m". 2. I agree 3, 4, & 5. yes 9. Still trying to decide :) 11. For builds, we might consider Nant (http://nant.sourceforge.net/). It's basically a .NET version of Apache Jakarta ANT 12. I jump back and forth b/w UltraEdit and VS.NET, but I've played with SharpDevelop and am willing to use it if that's what we decide ~Ian -----Original Message----- From: svg...@li... [mailto:svg...@li...] On Behalf Of Don XML Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 7:11 PM To: svg...@li... Subject: [Svgdomcsharp-developers] Fwd: some points .. Stefan is having problems emailing the list from his provider. I'm forwarding this for him. >From: "Goessner / MecXpert" <goe...@me...> >To: "Don XML" <do...@ho...>, ><svg...@li...> >Subject: some points .. >Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 00:28:51 +0100 > >hi, > >.. sorry, i can read all mails (twice:-), but seem to have problems >replying .. > >1) i would also prefer the .net naming conventions. >a) Pascal-casing for namespaces, classes, structs, delegates, enums .. >i.e. 'Svg', 'Xml', 'Uri' ? >b) Camel-casing for variables ? >c) member variables with or without leading 'm_' ? > >2) lists, arrays .. i would prefer to also implementer indexers >parallel to 'item', 'getItem' methods. > >3) properties instead of getters and setters .. yes absolutely. > >4) i would also vote for introducing enums instead of java constants. > >5) i don't know java very well, but i know that events are implemented >totally different. should we use delegates? i vote for those. > >6) maybe the NDOC documentation tool would help .. >http://ndoc.sourceforge.net/ > >8) i also recommend lutz roeders .net reflector .. >http://www.aisto.com/roeder/dotnet/ > >9) i would like to start with the interfaces in chapter 7 of the spec >'Coordinate Systems, Transformations and Units' and the implementations >of the underlying classes. > >10) exceptions .. if we have to decide from which to derive .. as a >rule of thumb, we should use the most lowerlevel class/interface until >there is a good reason to derive from a higherlevel class/interface. > >11) i would vote for also to support project makefiles .. i am quite >puristic and still working with the command line window. > >12) i work with the simple but good EditPlus editor, but have installed >SharpDevelop also. i will migrate, if we decide for it. >-- >stefan > > > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. _______________________________________________ Svgdomcsharp-developers mailing list Svg...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/svgdomcsharp-developers |