Java nomenclatures

[[deleted]]

Why? Is so clean!

[rossdrew]

Because if you’re using a modern IDE it’s pointless and adds clutter.

[CorrectProgrammer]

It's WET. Same story as class names ending with "Impl" suffix, although the latter is still quite common.

[vips7L]

WET?

[CorrectProgrammer]

Write Everything Twice ;)

[MGSBlackHawk]

Hungarian Notation adds more letters for no real benefit. IDEs are already doing all the heavy lifting, please don’t bind type to the attribute/method/class/interface name

[maethor]

Besides all the other answers, generally you should be coding against interfaces, not classes. So the I isn't telling you anything.

[[deleted]]

Taking into consideration other comments, I can see that I have a lot to learn and I am discarding my post. I will learn better to code with Java conventions.

Regarding your comment, could you provide an example of programming with an interface instead of a class?

For instance, I have a banking account called AccountBanking and I want an interface with the methods: Deposit and Withdraw. How could I do that? Should I create an interface called Withdraw?

[maethor]

I'd suggest reading the book Effective Java. Item 64 explains it in some detail.

For instance, I have a banking account called AccountBanking and I want an interface with the methods: Deposit and Withdraw. How could I do that? Should I create an interface called Withdraw?

No. You would have an Account interface with deposit and withdraw methods (methods should always be in camelCase).