what's the naming convention for a function that searches an entity by 4 parameters?
for instance GetCarByColourBrandStyleAndType sounds way too long although is descriptive enought IMO
Can't you just use SearchForCar for instance?
The paramaters (I expect are type, brand, color...) should give clarification? You can always make one or more parameters optional when you have for example another function saying GetCarByBrandColor()
Related
I'm searching for an alternative name for a method which create a resource when the one is not exist. Previously I used long names like "createAddressWhenNotExist" or "createAccountIfNotExist".
What do you think about "ensureAddress" or "ensureAccount"? If you find this name in code will you understand it?
I think the naming method/ function is not fully represent the actual process.
You must declare the function description in that function with comment.
And I think createAddrIfNotExist or createAccountIfNotExist are the good names.
I implement several global functions in our library that look something like this:
void init_time();
void init_random();
void init_shapes();
I would like to add functions to provide a check whether those have been called:
bool is_time_initialized();
bool is_random_initialized();
bool are_shapes_initialized();
However, as you can see are_shapes_initialized falls out of the row due to the fact that shapes is plural and therefore the function name must start with are and not is. This could be a problem, as the library is rather large and not having a uniform way to group similiar functions under the same naming convention might be confusing / upsetting.
E.g. a user using IntelliSense quickly looking up function names to see if the libary offers a way to check if their initialization call happened:
They won't find are_shapes_initialized() here unless scrolling through hundreds of additional function / class names.
Just going with is_shapes_initialized() could offer clarity:
As this displays all functions, now.
But how can using wrong grammar be a good approach? Shouldn't I just assume that the user should also ask IntelliSense for "are_initialized" or just look into the documentation in the first place? Probably not, right? Should I just give up on grammatical correctness?
The way I see it, a variable is a single entity. Maybe that entity is an aggregate of other entities, such as an array or a collection, in which case it would make sense to give it a plural name e.g. a set of Shape objects could be called shapes. Even so, it is still a single object. Looking at it that way, it is grammatically acceptable to refer to it as singular. After all, is_shapes_initialized actually means "Is the variable 'shapes' initialized?"
It's the same reason we say "The Bahamas is" or "The Netherlands is", because we are referring to the singular country, not whatever plural entity it is comprised of. So yes, is_shapes_initialized can be considered grammatically correct.
It's more a matter of personal taste. I would recommend putting "is" before functions that return Boolean. This would look more like:
bool is_time_initialized();
bool is_random_initialized();
bool is_shapes_initialized();
This makes them easier to find and search for, even if they aren't grammatically correct.
You can find functions using "are" to show it is plural in places such as the DuckDuckGo app, with:
areItemsTheSame(...)
areContentsTheSame(...)
In the DuckDuckGo app, it also uses "is" to show functions return boolean, and boolean variables:
val isFullScreen: Boolean = false
isAssignableFrom(...)
In OpenTK, a C# Graphics Library, I also found usage of "are":
AreTexturesResident(...)
AreProgramsResident(...)
In the same OpenTK Libary, they use "is" singularly for functions that return boolean and boolean variables:
IsEnabledGenlock(...)
bool isControl = false;
Either usage could work. Using "are" plurally would make more sense grammatically, and using "if" plurally could make more sense for efficiency or simplifying Boolean functions.
Here's what I would do, assuming you are trying to avoid calling this function on each shape.
void init_each_shape();
bool is_each_shape_initialized();
Also assuming that you need these functions, it seems like it would make more sense to have the functions throw an exception if they do not succeed.
I have a project where we have a mix of different naming when a function needs to find an object using a property given in parameter. I am wondering if there is a naming convention for the following:
function getObjectUsingName(name){} // A
function getObjectByName(name){} // B
function getObjectWithName(name){} // C
More basically, it there a different meaning between them or it is only a matter of choosing one?
I would say it is only matters for easy to read the code. And usually people choose "by". So function getObjectByName(name){} would be the nicest way but it is only based on my experience.
I have a function that decorates a string. If the decorated string is again fed to the function, it is guaranteed not to change. How is the standard naming convention for such a function? I'll probably create a namespace because I need to have a few of those functions.
I've come up with:
repetition_safe.decorate(me);
fixpoint_gen.decorate(me);
one_time_effect.decorate(me);
but I don't really like any of these.
How would you name the namespace or function?
How about:
StringDecorator.MakeImmutable(input);
I think "MakeImmutable" is better than "Decorate" as the later is ambiguous i.e. a user reading the code won't know what "decorate" does, whereas "makeImmutable" will inform the user that this function will make the input string immutable/non-changable.
In programming (and math) there are variables and constants. Is there a name to describe both of them?
I was thinking value, but that's not it. A value is what variables/constants contain, not what they are.
I would call it a symbol. From google:
sym·bol/ˈsimbəl/Noun
1. A thing that represents or stands for something else,
esp. a material object representing something abstract.
...
From what I know Its called a field
How about:
maths and logic: term
programming: l-value and r-value.
There are a few different terms I use, depending on context. I'll give you a list of the terms I (might) use - sometimes I'll just default to calling everything 'variables'.
Field - a variable or constant that's declared as part of the class definition.
Parameter - one of the inputs specified when defining a method in a class.
Argument - the actual value that you provide for a parameter when calling a method.
Method variable - a variable declared inside a method.
Method constant - a constant declared inside a method.
In OOP, the attribute can be both a variable and a constant.
Identifiers
In computer languages, identifiers are tokens (also called symbols) which name language entities. Some of the kinds of entities an identifier might denote include variables, types, labels, subroutines, and packages.
Symbols are super set of Identifiers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identifier#In_computer_languages
How about "data item"?
One definition: https://www.yourdictionary.com/data-item
Example showing it can be used for local variables/constants as well (unlike "field" or "attribute"): https://www.microfocus.com/documentation/visual-cobol/VC222/EclWin/GUID-A3B817EE-1D63-4F67-A62C-61DE681C6719.html