Current naming convention of abstract classes - BaseFoo vs. FooBase?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Keith Patrick
  • Start date Start date
K

Keith Patrick

This is probably a question for someone at MS, although I haven't found
anything in FxCop or definitive in the newsgroups regarding this, but what
is the current, if any, naming standard regarding base classes? A lot of
the older classes are Base<classname> (i.e BaseValidator), and some newer
ones - and these may be particular to ASP.Net 2 - follow the <classname>Base
pattern (i.e. ProviderBase). Is there a definitive direction the standards
are going on this (very minute) naming convention?
 
Keith said:
This is probably a question for someone at MS, although I haven't found
anything in FxCop or definitive in the newsgroups regarding this, but what
is the current, if any, naming standard regarding base classes? A lot of
the older classes are Base<classname> (i.e BaseValidator), and some newer
ones - and these may be particular to ASP.Net 2 - follow the <classname>Base
pattern (i.e. ProviderBase). Is there a definitive direction the standards
are going on this (very minute) naming convention?
Click to expand...

Someone with <http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0321246756> might be
able to answer this. Or you could always get it yourself :)
 
I bought it, and it has no mention of naming abstract classes. There's
about a page dedicated to them, and it's basically about their constructors.
 
Back
Top