On May 26, 2008, at 4:22 PM, David Reiss wrote:
The
method names are not idiomatic to ruby - I'm seeing things like
readStructEnd instead of read_struct_end and isOpen instead of open?.
I'm fine with changing these, but I am super biased against camelCase.
What do others think?
I think we should switch to ruby_case. It's not a disastrously large
change in any case.
I'm also seeing attempts to mimic Interfaces/virtual classes,
which is
just plain ugly (see TProtocol where every method returns nil).
As long as there is a nice way of documenting what methods are
expected
to be implemented in the concrete subclasses.
I would be happy with the "abstract" methods raising exceptions when
they're called. I think their definitions should still live though,
and perhaps with a little RDoc to actually explain their purposes.
