4 ms·

Then you go back and refactor the code to pull out the interface! I so hate interface abuse.

• sanderjd 9y ago
  If you use names like Logger instead of ILogger, you don't even have to change all the names when you refactor to an interface! If you end up wanting a FileBasedLogger, you just rename the current implementation to StdoutLogger, create a Logger interface, create a FileBasedLogger, and change instantiation sites to build the instance you want.
  • reitanqild 9y ago
    Using IClass naming is considered best practice in the .Net world AFAIK. (I think Visual Studio and/or Resharper hints very clearly about this.)
    • sanderjd 9y ago
      I know, I'm demonstrating one reason I think that's a bad best practice :) I recognize there's nothing most people can do about that, though!
    • hota_mazi 9y ago
      > Using IClass naming is considered best practice in the .Net world AFAIK. No, it's the opposite. IClass is the norm, for legacy reasons going all the way back to the early COM days (it all started with IUnknown[1]). [1] https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms680509(v=vs.85).aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms6...
  • hota_mazi 9y ago
    > If you use names like Logger instead of ILogger, you don't even have to change all the names when you refactor to an interface! But you want to, that's the point. You're making a drastic change to your code base, surely you want to inspect every place where that type is used.