Prohibition against prefixing interfaces with "I"

[scottmmjackson]

The Typescript Handbook tells the developer not to prefix interfaces with I. This needs more detail. Lots of .NET developers are familiar with I-prefixed interfaces. Simply stating that the concept is broader is not sufficient. If it's an antipattern, let's describe why. If it's not an antipattern, then let's say "it is not necessary to prefix interfaces with I, and Typescript Contributors do X"

[RyanCavanaugh]

I'm not entirely sure what more to write. .NET is the one with the rule (always prefix interfaces with I), not TypeScript. TypeScript code also generally shouldn't write names like lpcstrName like Win32 C code does. It's just a statement of "You shouldn't bring in this other framework's naming rules just because the keyword for the declaration is the same".

Any constructive ideas on how to phrase this?

[scottmmjackson]

"It is not necessary to prefix interfaces with 'I', as is done in C#."

Otherwise, what it sounds like you mean is that prefixing with I is a great way to encounter the ancient demons of code collision or bad coding practices. Right now it says "Do not", which is prohibitory language, not advisory language.

If there is a recommended style (like postfixing with Interface or Type or the like), that would be even better to note, rather than the discouraged prefix.

[mhegazy]

not to sound pedantic, but necessary/not necessary is not the right word, i do not think it is necessary to add I in C# nor is it in TS. i would say "you shouldn't use 'I'" is more accurate.

[DanielRosenwasser]

Agreed with @mhegazy.

[robgha01]

@mhegazy prefixing namespaces with I in c# is common sense how would you else like your code written using I distinguishes interfaces and abstracted classes ex: CarBase describes a abstract base for cars and the interface IAccelerate describes the method which incises the speed of the car not prefixing this with I means it could be anything i would never in the world work with code that dont prefix interfaces with I in c# its absurt.

[mhegazy]

@robgha01 this is a style choice. you are free to write C# code with no I prefixes, as well as TS code with them. This is a style recommendation we make, and one we use in our internal code base. the compile does not enforce any rules regarding names of interfaces or classes.

[JonathanYates]

I 'IS' for Interface. Nothing to do with .Net (although common sense prevails there).

Reasons are obvious and I fail to understand why anyone would not prefix an interface with 'I'.

1. Clearly identifies that it IS an interface.
2. Clearly distinguishes between an interface and an implementation.
3. What are you going to call the implementation if the interface is not prefix with I.
   e.g. Interface Foo. Err FooImpl as they do in Java. Please no!! IFoo and Foo makes it very clear.

I kind of feel the world has gone a little mad and lost it's marbles! Please prefix ALL interfaces with 'I' because 'I' IS for Interface.

[RyanCavanaugh]

Everyone knows to follow C++ naming conventions, so the class will be called CFoo thus there is no conflict. 🙄