StackOverflow2013

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals

PO
text
Body
copied!<p>I don't really have an answer, but three things for you to think about.</p> <ol> <li>The late Phil Karlton famously said: "There are only two hard problems in computer science. Cache Invalidation and Naming Things." So, the fact that you are having trouble coming up with good names is entirely normal and even expected.</li> <li>OTOH, having trouble naming things can also be a sign of bad design. (And yes, I am perfectly aware, that #1 and #2 contradict each other. Or maybe one should think of it more like balancing each other.) E.g., if a thing has too many responsibilities, it is pretty much impossible to come up with a good name. (Witness all the "Service", "Util", "Model" and "Manager" classes in bad OO designs. Here's an example Google Code Search for <a href="http://Google.Com/codesearch?q=ManagerFactoryFactory" rel="nofollow noreferrer">"ManagerFactoryFactory"</a>.)</li> <li>Also, your names should map to the domain jargon used by subject matter experts. If you can't find a subject matter expert, that's a sign that you are currently worrying about code that you're not supposed to worry about. (Basically, code that implements your core business domain should be implemented and designed well, code in ancillary domains should be implemented and designed so-so, and all other code should not be implemented or designed at all, but bought from a vendor, where what you are buying is <em>their</em> core business domain. [Please interpret "buy" and "vendor" liberally. Community-developed Free Software is just fine.])</li> </ol> <p>Regarding #3 above, you mentioned in another comment that you are currently working on implementing a tree data structure. Unless your company is in the business of selling tree data structures, that is not a part of your core domain. And the reason that you have trouble finding good names could be that you are working outside your core domain. Now, "selling tree data structures" may sound stupid, but there <em>are</em> actually companies that do that. For example, the BCL team inside Microsoft's developer division: they actually sell (well, for certain definitions of "sell", anyway) the .NET framework's Base Class Libraries, which include, among others, tree data structures. But note that for example Microsoft's C++ compiler team actually (literally) buys <em>their</em> STL from a third-party vendor – they figure that their core domain is writing compilers, and they leave the writing of libraries to a company who considers writing STLs <em>their</em> core domain. (And indeed, AFAIK, that company does <em>nothing but</em> write and sell STL implementations. That's their sole product.)</p> <p>If, however, selling tree data structures <em>is</em> your core domain, then the names you listed are just fine. They are the names that subject matter experts (programmers, in this case) use when talking about the domain of tree data structures.</p>

Querying!

Guidance

An individual column

Larger individual text columns get their own page to allow for proper reading.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload