[Solar-talk] Quick thoughts on new factory() method instantiation

[Travis Swicegood]

Paul M Jones wrote:
> On Jan 3, 2007, at 12:16 PM, Travis Swicegood wrote:
>
>   
>> I was just thinking about this yesterday actually.  What about  
>> naming it
>> _solarFactory().  Of course, it would still need to be public so
>> Solar::factory() could call it, but my thought is that it shouldn't be
>> called directly, so creating the pseudo-protected naming would help
>> underline that.
>>     
>
> I thought of that, but it's a style break.  If I break my own rules,  
> who can I expect to follow them?
>   

It's not a style break, it's a style addition ;-)

It could be that the style accommodates public methods that are only 
meant to be called by the internal framework use the '_' prefix to 
denote they're not supposed to be used publicly.

-Travis