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
|
