blocks|key|750525|text|Setter:+public+void+setCurrent(boolean+val)
Getter:+public+boolean+getCurrent()|type|code-block|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|syntax|javascript|750526|对于布尔值，您还可以使用|unstyled|750527|public+boolean+isCurrent()|750528|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$B|C]]|$1|D|3|E|5|F|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|G|3|H|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$B|C]]|$1|I|3|-4|5|F|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|J|$]]

<pre><code>Setter: public void setCurrent(boolean val)
Getter: public boolean getCurrent()
</code></pre>

For booleans you can also use 

<pre><code>public boolean isCurrent()
</code></pre>

blocks|key|750592|text|我believe它会是：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|750593|void+setCurrent(boolean+current)
boolean+isCurrent()|code-block|syntax|javascript|750594|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaBean^0|1|7|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@$A|R|B|S|1|T]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|F|7|U|8|@]|9|@]|C|$G|H]]|$1|I|3|-4|5|6|7|V|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|J|$K|$5|L|M|N|C|$O|P]]]]

I <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaBean" rel="noreferrer">believe</a> it would be:

<pre><code>void setCurrent(boolean current)
boolean isCurrent()
</code></pre>

blocks|key|966185|text|也许是时候开始修改这个答案了？就我个人而言，我会投票给setActive()和unsetActive()+(根据上下文的不同，可以选择setUnActive()，notActive()，disable()等)，因为"setActive“意味着你在任何时候都会激活它，而你并不是这样做的。说"setActive”，但实际上却删除了活动状态，这有点违反直觉。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|966186|另一个问题是，你不能以CQRS的方式来监听特定的SetActive事件，你需要监听一个'setActiveEvent‘，并确定监听器内部是否被设置为活动状态。当然，也可以决定在调用setActive()时调用哪个事件，但这与关注点分离原则背道而驰。|966187|关于这一点的一个很好的读物是Martin+Fowler的FlagArgument文章：http://martinfowler.com/bliki/FlagArgument.html|966188|然而，我有PHP背景，并且看到这种趋势越来越多地被采用。不确定这在多大程度上适用于Java开发。|966189|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://martinfowler.com/bliki/FlagArgument.html^0|R|B|13|D|1V|D|29|B|2L|9|0|2I|B|0|17|1B|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|T|8|@$9|U|A|V|B|C]|$9|W|A|X|B|C]|$9|Y|A|Z|B|C]|$9|10|A|11|B|C]|$9|12|A|13|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|14|8|@$9|15|A|16|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|17|8|@]|D|@$9|18|A|19|1|1A]]|E|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|1B|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|L|3|-4|5|6|7|1C|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|M|$N|$5|O|P|Q|E|$R|S]]]]

Maybe it is time to start revising this answer? Personally I would vote for <code>setActive()</code> and <code>unsetActive()</code> (alternatives can be <code>setUnActive()</code>, <code>notActive()</code>, <code>disable()</code>, etc. depending on context) since "setActive" implies you activate it at all times, which you don't. It's kind of counter intuitive to say "setActive" but actually remove the active state.

Another problem is, you can can not listen to specifically a SetActive event in a CQRS way, you would need to listen to a 'setActiveEvent' and determine inside that listener wether is was actually set active or not. Or of course determine which event to call when calling <code>setActive()</code> but that then goes against the Separation of Concerns principle.

A good read on this is the FlagArgument article by Martin Fowler: <a href="http://martinfowler.com/bliki/FlagArgument.html" rel="noreferrer">http://martinfowler.com/bliki/FlagArgument.html</a>

However, I come from a PHP background and see this trend being adopted more and more. Not sure how much this lives with Java development.

blocks|key|750672|text|private+boolean+current;

public+void+setCurrent(boolean+current){
++++this.current=current;
}

public+boolean+hasCurrent(){
++++return+this.current;
}|type|code-block|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|syntax|javascript|750673|unstyled|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$B|C]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|E|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|F|$]]

<pre><code>private boolean current;

public void setCurrent(boolean current){
 this.current=current;
}

public boolean hasCurrent(){
 return this.current;
}
</code></pre>

blocks|key|750691|text|作为一名二传手，如何：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|750692|//+setter
public+void+beCurrent(boolean+X)+{
++++this.isCurrent+=+X;
}|code-block|syntax|javascript|750693|或|750694|//+setter
public+void+makeCurrent(boolean+X)+{
++++this.isCurrent+=+X;
}|750695|我不确定这些命名对以英语为母语的人是否有意义。|750696|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|O|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|G|3|H|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|I|3|J|5|D|7|R|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|K|3|L|5|6|7|S|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|M|3|-4|5|6|7|T|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|N|$]]

As a setter, how about:

<pre><code>// setter
public void beCurrent(boolean X) {
 this.isCurrent = X;
}
</code></pre>

or

<pre><code>// setter
public void makeCurrent(boolean X) {
 this.isCurrent = X;
}
</code></pre>

I'm not sure if these naming make sense to native English speakers.

blocks|key|750770|text|它应该像其他getter一样获取{varname}。将其更改为"is“并不能阻止错误的变量名称，它只是创建了另一个不必要的规则。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|750771|考虑程序生成的代码，或反射派生。|750772|这是一个无用的约定，应该在第一个可用的机会就放弃。|750773|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|$]]

It should just be get{varname} like every other getter. Changing it to &quot;is&quot; doesn't stop bad variable names, it just makes another unnecessary rule.
Consider program generated code, or reflection derivations.
It's a non-useful convention that should be dropped at the first available opportunity.

Eg.

<pre><code>boolean isCurrent = false;
</code></pre>

What do you name its getter and setter?

For a boolean field, what is the naming convention for its getter/setter?

Java

例如：boolean isCurrent = false;你把它的getter和setter命名为什么？

问对于布尔型字段，其getter/setter的命名约定是什么？
EN

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

问对于布尔型字段，其getter/setter的命名约定是什么？EN

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

问对于布尔型字段，其getter/setter的命名约定是什么？
EN