From: "Erik Hatcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > - public void setFile(File file) {
> > - this.file = file;
> > + public void setFile(File aFile) {
> > + this.file = aFile;
> > }
>
> I'm not fond of this change.... this means that the Javadoc will show the
> parameter as "aFile" rather than "file".
>
> I understand the rationale to making the method attribute different from
the
> member variable, although my style is still to leave them the same. I
think
> the prefixed underscores for private member variables is perhaps a better
Let's say a setter method sets a protected member
variable. Changing the protected member variable
name in Ant1 would not be possible. So, I sacrificed
outwards elegance for internal consistency - I wouldn't
like to name private members alone as m_whatever and
rename arguments to a_whatever or do nothing at all in
case they modified protected members.
> scheme. Anyway, I think the outward interface and documentation is more
> important than the internal naming conventions.
+1, but how to achieve that in a consistent manner in Ant1
while at the same time satisfy Quality Analyzer?
>
> Erik
>
Cheers,
Magesh
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
