Minor update to the base class guidelines

RE: Minor update to the base class guidelines

Keith Patrick — Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:35:00 GMT

Sorry for being nitpicky (hey, I *did* say I was systematic rather than pragmatic), but the return type is not part of the signature :)

RE: Minor update to the base class guidelines

Shane King — Mon, 24 Nov 2003 05:21:00 GMT

The ability to just throw Exception is useful. If I'm just doing something quick and dirty, I'd rather not have to make my own exception class, and just throwing an Exception is perfect. Or if I'm in the middle of building some code, I'll throw an Exception and put a TODO note against it so I can come back later and add in the proper exception without having to do it right now. Taking away convenience for the sake of trying to force people to do the "right thing" is a bad design choice, IMO. Sometimes what you think is the right thing isn't the right thing for every situation!

RE: Minor update to the base class guidelines

Ken Brubaker — Mon, 24 Nov 2003 15:20:00 GMT

Brad, thank you for these insightful updates. I am especially pleased that you explicitly reserve the Base suffix for implementation inheritance. I knew that the FCL already followed this pattern, but I had a hard time convincing my staff not to use base for public inheritance. I have used, quite unapologetically, the Class Library Design Guidelines as my code review standard. I would LOVE to pay for an annotated reference, such as this post, in book form. Do you have any plans for publishing your Code and UI guidelines? In response to Shane: The FCL team clearly denominates the guidelines as Class Library guidelines, not hack coding guidelines. I'm sure Brad has no problems with you using Exception in your one-off code. Just don't use it in a commercial class library. (However, you should at least use ApplicationException)

A compilation of new .NET Design Guidelines

Ken Brubaker — Fri, 20 Feb 2004 18:48:00 GMT

For my own reference, I thought I'd compile a quick list of design guidelines added by Brad Abrams, et al.

re: Minor update to the base class guidelines

Kevin Dente — Wed, 03 Mar 2004 04:51:00 GMT

Brad, I was just reading through Rob Howard's discussion of the ASP.NET provider model in Whidbey. It looks like the provider classes he describes use the Base suffix, seemingly contradicting the guideline listed in this posting. Is there a particular reason for this?

Whidbey Provider Design Pattern pitfalls

Daniel Cazzulino .NET and XML digress — Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:12:00 GMT

Whidbey Provider Design Pattern pitfalls

Daniel Cazzulino .NET and XML digress — Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:38:00 GMT

Brad Abrams Minor update to the base class guidelines | patio umbrella

Brad Abrams Minor update to the base class guidelines | patio umbrella — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 06:46:56 GMT

PingBack from http://patioumbrellasource.info/story.php?id=257