Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
There is a Style Guide for Protocol Buffers. But it does not clearly say how a .proto file should be named.
MyProtos.proto, my_protos.proto or my-protos.proto, which is the better name?
I don't believe there's an appropriate answer to how any file "should be named" other than aim for consistency and clarity.
Consistency would mean following the file-naming conventions your project already has for sources and headers. If your sources are named using camel-case, do the same for the proto files. The most common choice seems to me to be the my_protos.proto version.
Clarity to me means that the file name should give some clue as to the contents. I generally favour naming files after the class which they implement, and usually have a separate file (pair) per class. I would recommend the same for the proto files. I prefer several small proto files each defining a single Message or very closely related Messages over a single huge proto file defining all your Messages in the one place.
Since the question is almost 8 year old, for those who people looking at this in 2020 s, now there is a style guide published by google.
Excerpt for file naming
Files should be named lower_snake_case.proto
https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/style
Related
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 2 days ago.
Improve this question
I have a question that may seem silly, my english is not very good, I often don't know how to name variables or methods.
For example, There is a method, its function is to open a modal for creating users, I will name it openCreateUserModal, Its corresponding English sentence is "open create user modal", I think this is not grammatical in English because there are two verbs. Would it be better to name it openCreatingUserModal？Or the method name does not need to follow English grammar?
I want to get a rule for naming complex methods
openCreateUserModal is perfectly fine. It clearly conveys what the function does. Following the rules of english grammar is not important in this context as long as the function name clearly indicates what the function does.
Since you haven't mentioned any particular language, below is a source c# naming conventions. The principles are the same for any programming language.
https://csharp-book.softuni.org/Content/Chapter-10-methods/method-naming/method-naming.html
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
While working on a Spring Boot project I got this doubt that what is better to use to Save Constant Values, application properties file or a Java Interface?
To get value from application.properties we have to declare variables in every file where for Java Interface, we will have only one declared variable referred everywhere.
Any other advantage one over other. Can anyone figure out in terms of memory efficiency?
The advantage of using application properties is you can change the value without changing code. If you think something is likely to change, or if it is different for different environments, then it would make sense to put it in the properties. You can define multiple profiles and have a properties file for each profile if needed.
If you are sure something isn’t going to change then define a constant. In that case you’re assigning a name to a value to improve the readability of the code.
This kind of thing seems unlikely to be significant enough for it to matter for performance. Performance improvement is about identifying and addressing the biggest bottleneck. This is going to be a long way down the list.
Using application properties file to save constant is preferred.
You can check this link for detailed explanation:
What is the best way to implement constants in Java?
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
Which name is better, repository.UserRepository or repository.User?
I'm thinking about naming recently.
I have referenced several sources and they are talking.
Think about the context and name it.
Here is the link.
https://talks.golang.org/2014/names.slide#2
https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/CodeReviewComments
Additionally, Can you also recommend a project that can be referred to when creating an http server?
according to the golang official ducument
The importer of a package will use the name to refer to its contents, so exported names in the package can use that fact to avoid stutter. (Don't use the import . notation, which can simplify tests that must run outside the package they are testing, but should otherwise be avoided.) For instance, the buffered reader type in the bufio package is called Reader, not BufReader, because users see it as bufio.Reader, which is a clear, concise name. Moreover, because imported entities are always addressed with their package name, bufio.Reader does not conflict with io.Reader.
repository.User may be good then repository.UserRepository
the package in src/encoding/base64 is imported as "encoding/base64" not "encoding/base64Encoding"
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I have a Go package that declares and uses some constants in file1.go. Now I add a new file to the package, file2.go, which refers to constants in file1.go.
Would you move the shared constants into a new file, like consts.go, since they don't "belong" to one file or the other? Or do you leave them in file1.go and assume that someone looking at file2.go can use their IDE or editor or grep to locate the shared constants?
Using const.go file is an idiomatic way, see Go standard library.
For example see: math/const.go
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I have a project I am working on that is written in Python. The variable/class/function/everything names do not adhere to the Python style guide.
example: a variable might be called myRandomVariable instead of the proper: my_random_variable
My question is, is it worth combing through all the code (around 10,000 lines) to fix all the naming convention problems or should I just say, 'the heck with it -- it works'?
Thanks
Edited to give example
Just because there is a Python style guide, it does not mean that all Python code should adhere to it. The most important thing to consider in a code base is that it's consistent with itself, at LEAST on a per-file basis, preferably across the project!
I would vote for your second option. They are just styles. Everyone will have their own style. You don't need to be in compilance with defined styles to say your product is great.