Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 9220879
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 18, 20262026-06-18T03:27:04+00:00 2026-06-18T03:27:04+00:00

Currently I use same convention for class names and method names. They have a

  • 0

Currently I use same convention for class names and method names. They have a leading capital letter without prefix. And I don’t use “Get” prefix to get an attribute. However, I meet a name conflict problem in the following code

class Material
{};

class Background
{
public:
    Material* Material() const             {return m_material;}  // Name conflict
    void SetMaterial(Material* material)   {m_material = material;}

private:
    Material* m_material;
};

What is the easiest way to solve the problem but keeping or with minimum modification of my conventions? Thanks a lot!

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-18T03:27:05+00:00Added an answer on June 18, 2026 at 3:27 am

    What is the easiest way to solve the problem but keeping or with
    minimum modification of my conventions?

    The easiest way might be to slightly modify the convention, such as start method names with lowercase.

    BTW, I like that you are not using the word “get” in the accessor method. In the same spirit, you may drop the word “set” in the mutator method (here, SetMaterial()). The signature would be sufficient to distinguish the accessor and mutator.

    If you like them, you would reach at:

    class Material
    {};
    
    class Background
    {
    public:
        Material* material() const          {return m_material;}
        void material(Material* material)   {m_material = material;}
    
    private:
        Material* m_material;
    };
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have some c3p0 pool encapsulated in a class that I use to execute
I am currently trying to implement a class to use as a buffer for
Currently I'm running several websites that have several (branded) duplicates each, in the same
I currently use Zend_Db to manage my queries $stmt = $db->prepare(INSERT INTO test (ID_Test)
I currently use Devise 2.1 + Rails 3.2.x to authenticate users. I'm also going
I currently use the rectangle shape xml tag to specify borders for my views
I currently use a combination of LVL and Proguard as a first line of
I currently use mysql_real_escape_string to escape a variable when querying the database to prevent
I currently use Berkeley DBs fronted by a Java server for a high-performance disk-backed
I currently use: BufferedReader input = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(filename)); Is there a faster way?

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.