Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

4
  • I don't see why so many find it useful to distinguish interfaces from other types by means of type naming. A modern IDE will place a nice icon next to the file name. Besides, if you're not familiar with the type, chances are you're going to need to open it up and read the source/docs anyway. Commented Aug 2, 2013 at 18:14
  • 2
    @i3ensays: "Next to the filename" assumes you're looking at it in a package browser or whatever. I'd rather not have to take any action when just reading the code. Yes, I can look everything up, but I'd rather not. It's definitely a subjective thing, but I like the .NET convention for this. Commented Aug 2, 2013 at 18:26
  • this probably depends on your text editor / IDE, but in-code intellisense handles the distinctions for me quite well. For example, when I type "new" while declaring an assignment I can auto-complete the assignment with all known implementing types showing in a subcontext menu. Commented Sep 13, 2013 at 23:27
  • 2
    @i3ensays: That's when you're writing code. I spend more time reading code than writing it... and a lot of that time is in diff views etc rather than IDEs. Commented Sep 14, 2013 at 8:17