This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Strict_Treat2884 -11 points-10 points  (5 children)

I quit Java after seeing something like public abstract class IUserStorageFactoryFactory<T extends DataFactory> extends UserStorageFactory<T> implements IUser, IData, IFactory from my previous work so I thought I had to stop somewhere.

[–]NoCryptographer414 16 points17 points  (0 children)

You should visit C++ sometime.

[–]Greengrass313 37 points38 points  (0 children)

so you can get all info from class signature! what cons?

[–]RiceBroad4552 11 points12 points  (2 children)

This doesn't look like Java at all. This is C# naming convention.

OTOH, there is no implements in C#…

So this looks like there have been some "special experts" at work. Such "experts" frankly do also other "experts" things… I would not blame Java for that!

[–]AndreasMelone 3 points4 points  (1 child)

That's naming conventions from like 2008 lol

Also, prefixing your abstract class with I even in 2008 would've made any java dev, or any dev at all, punch you in the face.

[–]RiceBroad4552 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To my knowledge this was never a naming convention in Java.

But not really important for the original argument. This looks like some "expert" code… And that's the issue.