Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    text
    copied!<ol> <li><p>Interface names should always be an adjective and if possible should end in "able" has been the trend in naming conventions within the Java community. That does not have to be followed strictly, its just a naming convention, there is nothing to stop you from naming the interface/class whatever you want.</p></li> <li><p>Yes, see <a href="http://www.iwombat.com/standards/JavaStyleGuide.html#Class%20and%20Interface%20Names" rel="nofollow">http://www.iwombat.com/standards/JavaStyleGuide.html#Class%20and%20Interface%20Names</a></p></li> <li><p>Clonable</p></li> </ol> <p>*Note, Interface names should generally be adjectives, whereas class names should generally be nouns.</p> <p>Check out page 15 of this style guide document released by Sun. <a href="http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/CodeConventions.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://java.sun.com/docs/codeconv/CodeConventions.pdf</a></p> <p>There is also some debate as to if it is a good style to add the letter I to interfaces. (Example: ICat, IDog, etc.), but that generally applies to other languages and not to Java per say.</p> <p>In my personal opinion a convention is just a "rule of thumb", if the convention gets in the way of the readability of your code, go with a more descriptive interface/class name instead of the one that follows convention, but if your really struggling to come up with a good descriptive class name, maybe you need to think about the functionality of your class/interface again a bit more.</p>
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

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