blocks|key|1431194|text|public+boolean+userExists(...)|type|code-block|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|syntax|javascript|1431195|那将是我的首选。因为它使你的条件检查更像是自然英语：|unstyled|1431196|if+userExists+...|1431197|但我想没有硬性规定--只要保持一致就行了。|1431198|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$B|C]]|$1|D|3|E|5|F|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|G|3|H|5|6|7|O|8|@]|9|@]|A|$B|C]]|$1|I|3|J|5|F|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|K|3|-4|5|F|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|L|$]]

<pre><code>public boolean userExists(...)
</code></pre>

Would be my prefered. As it makes your conditional checks far more like natural english:

<pre><code>if userExists ...
</code></pre>

But I guess there is no hard and fast rule - just be consistent

blocks|key|1216394|text|我会说userExists，因为90%25的时间我的调用代码看起来像这样：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|1216395|if+userExists(...)+{
++...
}|code-block|syntax|javascript|1216396|而且它的英文读起来非常直白。|1216397|if+isUserExist和if+doesUserExist似乎是多余的。|1216398|entityMap^0|3|A|0|0|0|0|E|F|G|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|Q|8|@$9|R|A|S|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|H|7|T|8|@]|D|@]|E|$I|J]]|$1|K|3|L|5|6|7|U|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|M|3|N|5|6|7|V|8|@$9|W|A|X|B|C]|$9|Y|A|Z|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|O|3|-4|5|6|7|10|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|P|$]]

I would say <code>userExists</code>, because 90% of the time my calling code will look like this:

<pre><code>if userExists(...) {
 ...
}
</code></pre>

and it reads very literally in English.

<code>if isUserExist</code> and <code>if doesUserExist</code> seem redundant.

blocks|key|1431507|text|可读性的目标应该始终是编写尽可能接近自然语言的代码。因此，在这种情况下，userExists似乎是最佳选择。然而，在另一种情况下使用前缀"is“可能是正确的，例如isProcessingComplete。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|1431508|entityMap^0|10|A|29|K|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@$9|I|A|J|B|C]|$9|K|A|L|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|M|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|G|$]]

The goal for readability should always be to write code the closest possible to natural language. So in this case, <code>userExists</code> seems the best choice. Using the prefix "is" may nonetheless be right in another situations, for example <code>isProcessingComplete</code>.

blocks|key|1216717|text|我会选择userExists()，因为1)它在自然语言中很有意义，2)它遵循我所见过的API的约定。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1216718|要查看它在自然语言中是否有意义，请大声朗读。“如果用户存在”听起来更像是一个有效的英语短语，而不是“如果用户存在”或“如果用户存在”。“如果用户存在”会更好，但是"+the“在方法名中可能是多余的。|1216719|要查看文件是否存在于JavaSE6中，您可以使用use+File.exists()命令。这看起来将是相同的in+version+7。C#使用the+same+convention，Python和Ruby也是如此。希望这是一个足够多样化的集合，可以称之为语言不可知的答案。通常，我会支持与您的语言的API保持一致的命名方法。|offset|length|1216720|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/io/File.html#exists())|1|http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/io/File.html#exists())|2|http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.io.file.exists(VS.71).aspx)|3|http://www.penzilla.net/tutorials/python/fileio/|4|http://ruby-doc.org/core/classes/File.html^0|0|0|O|H|0|1H|C|1|1Y|J|2|2I|6|3|2P|4|4|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|Y|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|Z|8|@]|9|@$F|10|G|11|1|12]|$F|13|G|14|1|15]|$F|16|G|17|1|18]|$F|19|G|1A|1|1B]|$F|1C|G|1D|1|1E]]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|1F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|I|$J|$5|K|L|M|A|$N|O]]|P|$5|K|L|M|A|$N|Q]]|R|$5|K|L|M|A|$N|S]]|T|$5|K|L|M|A|$N|U]]|V|$5|K|L|M|A|$N|W]]]]

I would go with userExists() because 1) it makes sense in natural language, and 2) it follows the conventions of the APIs I have seen.

To see if it make sense in natural language, read it out loud. "If user exists" sounds more like a valid English phrase than "if is user exists" or "if does user exist". "If the user exists" would be better, but "the" is probably superfluous in a method name.

To see whether a file exists in Java SE 6, you would <a href="http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/io/File.html#exists()" rel="nofollow noreferrer">use File.exists()</a>. This looks like it will be the same <a href="http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/io/File.html#exists()" rel="nofollow noreferrer">in version 7</a>. C# uses <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.io.file.exists(VS.71).aspx" rel="nofollow noreferrer">the same convention</a>, as do <a href="http://www.penzilla.net/tutorials/python/fileio/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Python</a> and <a href="http://ruby-doc.org/core/classes/File.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ruby</a>. Hopefully, this is a diverse enough collection to call this a language-agnostic answer. Generally, I would side with naming methods in keeping with your language's API.

blocks|key|1217019|text|我对这个问题的简单规则是：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1217020|如果布尔方法已经有一个动词，就不要添加一个。否则，请考虑它。下面是一些例子：|1217021|$user->exists()
$user->loggedIn()
$user->isGuest()+//+"is"+added|code-block|syntax|javascript|1217022|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|F|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$G|H]]|$1|I|3|-4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|J|$]]

My simple rule to this question is this:

If the boolean method already HAS a verb, don't add one. Otherwise, consider it. Some examples:

<pre><code>$user-&gt;exists()
$user-&gt;loggedIn()
$user-&gt;isGuest() // "is" added
</code></pre>

blocks|key|1431298|text|纯粹是主观的。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1431299|我更喜欢userExists(...)，因为像这样的语句读起来更好：|offset|length|style|CODE|1431300|if+(+userExists(+...+)+)|code-block|syntax|javascript|1431301|或|1431302|while+(+userExists(+...+)+)|1431303|entityMap^0|0|4|F|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|S|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|T|8|@$D|U|E|V|F|G]]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|J|7|W|8|@]|9|@]|A|$K|L]]|$1|M|3|N|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|O|3|P|5|J|7|Y|8|@]|9|@]|A|$K|L]]|$1|Q|3|-4|5|6|7|Z|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|R|$]]

Purely subjective.

I prefer <code>userExists(...)</code> because then statements like this read better:

<pre><code>if ( userExists( ... ) )
</code></pre>

or

<pre><code>while ( userExists( ... ) )
</code></pre>

blocks|key|1431386|text|在这种特殊的情况下，第一个例子是如此糟糕的英语，它让我退缩。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1431387|我可能会选择第三个，因为在if语句中读取它时，它听起来很像。“如果用户存在”听起来比“如果用户存在”要好。|1431388|当然，这是假设它将用于if语句测试...|1431389|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|G|$]]

In this particular case, the first example is such horrible English that it makes me wince. 

I'd probably go for number three because of how it sounds when reading it in if statements. "If user exists" sounds better than "If does user exists".

This is assuming it's going to be to used in if statement tests of course...

blocks|key|1431467|text|我喜欢其中的任何一个：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1431468|userExists(...)
isUserNameTaken(...)
User.exists(...)
User.lookup(...)+!=+null|code-block|syntax|javascript|1431469|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|G|3|-4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|H|$]]

I like any of these:

<pre><code>userExists(...)
isUserNameTaken(...)
User.exists(...)
User.lookup(...) != null
</code></pre>

blocks|key|1431673|text|方法名用于可读性，只有适合整个代码的名称才是最好的，因为大多数情况下它都是以条件开头的，因此subjectPredicate遵循自然的句子结构。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1431674|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

Method names serves for readability, only the ones fit into your whole code would be the best which most of the case it begins with conditions thus subjectPredicate follows natural sentence structure.

blocks|key|1217057|text|那么为什么不重命名这个属性呢？|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1217058|if+(user.isPresent())+{|code-block|syntax|javascript|1217059|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|G|3|-4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|H|$]]

Why not rename the property then?

<pre><code>if (user.isPresent()) {
</code></pre>

blocks|key|1431989|text|因为我遵循将动词放在函数名之前的惯例，所以我在这里也会这样做：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1431990|//method+name
public+boolean+doesExists(...)

//this+way+you+can+also+keep+a+variable+to+store+the+result
bool+userExists+=+user.doesExists()

//and+use+it+like+a+english+phrase
if+(userExists)+{...}

//or+you+can+use+the+method+name+directly+also+and+it+will+make+sense+here+too
if+(user.doesExists())+{...}|code-block|syntax|javascript|1431991|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|G|3|-4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|H|$]]

Since I follow the convention to put verb before function name, I would do the same here too:
<pre><code>//method name
public boolean doesExists(...)

//this way you can also keep a variable to store the result
bool userExists = user.doesExists()

//and use it like a english phrase
if (userExists) {...}

//or you can use the method name directly also and it will make sense here too
if (user.doesExists()) {...}
</code></pre>

Simple question, from a readability standpoint, which method name do you prefer for a boolean method:

<pre><code>public boolean isUserExist(...)
</code></pre>

or:

<pre><code>public boolean doesUserExist(...)
</code></pre>

or:

<pre><code>public boolean userExists(...)
</code></pre>

Boolean method naming readability

简单的问题是，从可读性的角度来看，对于布尔方法，您更喜欢哪个方法名：public boolean isUserExist(...)或者：public boolean doesUserExist(...)或者：public boolean userExists(...)

问布尔方法命名的可读性
EN

回答 11

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

资源

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问布尔方法命名的可读性EN

回答 11

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

资源

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问布尔方法命名的可读性
EN