Framework Design Guidelines: Supporting Experimentation

infoblog » Framework Design Guidelines: Supporting Experimentation

infoblog » Framework Design Guidelines: Supporting Experimentation — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 17:50:43 GMT

PingBack from http://blog.a-foton.ru/index.php/2008/11/24/framework-design-guidelines-supporting-experimentation/

re: Framework Design Guidelines: Supporting Experimentation

Shail — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:18:51 GMT

Hello Brad,

I have finished chapter 3 of the book just now about naming guidelines . There is guideline which says that name of the types should not match with name of types in .Net framework. And if that is the case this means that its a "Sloppy" design ( As per krzysztof Cwalina's annotation )

But consider this case ( Its a real world case for my current project )

In my Business domain I have "Services" and "Providers". These terms are used in the domain for last 20 years. Its a common term used by customer and now also by developers. So I need to name my classes as "Service" and "Provider".

But this is somewhere clashing with the .Net framework types.

I can find alternate name for my classes. But what should be your solution to this, assuming that you are in my place ????

Shail

re: Framework Design Guidelines: Supporting Experimentation

BradA — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 19:47:24 GMT

Shail – Thanks for your comments.. My first thought is if you can be slightly more specific in your naming… Perhaps you want HealthCareSerivces or EmployeeServices, etc.. Or, perhaps you could ask what part of the .NET Framework uses the “Services” name and if that is likely\common to be used with your component or not. If it is not then maybe you don’t have as much of an issue.

re: Framework Design Guidelines: Supporting Experimentation

Shail — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:59:29 GMT

Yes, Brad you are right, I think I can use the word "Service", I have just added a note in my technical document not to get confused with a web service or any other type from .Net Framework. I will make sure all will read note at first. Also it will stay in my Business Namepspace say XYZ, so even there will be a new type in .Net named "Service". There will be less hassels. In case of service I can not be specific as a service is a service, its differentiated by its type and there can be 100 types

For provider class, I have named it as "ServiceProvider"

That is more close to business term and more specific. After all there was one very good annotation from krzysztof Cwalina

"There is no perfect Framework" :)

I should leave something for my next assignment. Annotations in the book are really helpful and add more value and are kind of POC to the context.

Shail