Some Basic Questions

[Lutger]

Kirk McDonald wrote:
> Lutger wrote:
>> Derek Parnell wrote:
>>
>>> No, I suggest you use a different naming convention. I would have your
>>> class name start with a Capital letter and have your source file name 
>>> all
>>> lowercase. And if you stick to one class per file, have your filename
>>> different to the class by adding a suffix or prefix. For example,
>>>
>>>   module foo_m;
>>>   class Foo
>>>   {
>>>    ...
>>>   }
>>
>>
>> Can I ask you, what is your reason for naming a source file 
>> differently than the class? Does it have something to do with 
>> importing magic?
> 
> The name of the source file and the name of the class are completely 
> orthogonal. They have nothing to do with each other. They may be the 
> same or different as you wish. This is not Java: A source file can 
> contain zero classes or as many classes as you like.
> 
> That said, it is convention to name source files and modules completely 
> lower-case, and to start class names with a capital. However, the 
> language does not actually enforce either of these. If nothing else, it 
> is a /very bad/ idea to ever name the source file and the module 
> different things, even if they just differ in capitalization.
> 

I've noticed that unfortunatly, it can create quite a mess. I'm coming 
from C++, I don't know how Java handles it. Does it enforce it that hard?

Maybe I've misunderstood it, I thought Derek Parnell meant the following:

     module foo.bar; // corresponds to foo/bar.d
     class Bar // don't do this, use a different name
     {
         ...
     }
To avoid names such foo.bar.Bar, "if you stick to one class per file." 
This is something different than naming source file and module different.