[Mono-osx] MonoMac naming conventions
duane at wandless.net
Tue Apr 20 13:31:43 EDT 2010
I do understand this strategy. And thanks for the link to the guidelines...
it was very interesting.
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Miguel de Icaza <miguel at novell.com> wrote:
> I'd like to suggest keeping to the naming convention of the obj-c classes.
>> For example the MonoMac binding for NSArray.objectAtIndex has been changed
>> to ValueAt. The main reason not to change the names is for documentation.
>> I can look up what NSArray objectAtIndex does on the web very easily. But I
>> have to perform a translation of ValueAt to get to objectAtIndex. Yes this
>> example is trivial but the argument holds up as more of the core libraries
>> are bound.
> That is a core design decision of these bindings. If you want the
> approach you describe there are other Cocoa bindings that you can use that
> offer that possibility.
> For MonoMac, you will have two options:
> * The translated docs that we produce.
> * The "Rosetta stone" approach:
> Our naming is designed to match the Framework Design Guidelines naming
> Ideally I could take obj-c code and do a line by line translation. There
>> may be better ways to write the code in C# MonoMac but the rewrite should
>> not require function name changes.
> That is not what MonoMac is designed to do.
> Another example is: NSURLConnection. This was changed to NSUrlConnection.
> That is done per the Framework Design Guidelines.
> For a quick easy-to-read rationale read:
> Or on the web:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mono-osx