Naming and Structure Conventions in Mendix from a library perspective

Did you know that The largest library in the world is the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C.. It holds an estimated 164 million items and spans over 1,350 kilometers of bookshelves. Libraries use classification systems, like Dewey Decimal or Library of Congress, arrange books by subject matter. Books on similar topics are grouped together on the shelves, making it easier for library users to find related information.

For a Library, the system (a set of agreements) is the strongest and weakest characteristic it has. The predefined system (and its order) is based on 3 basic principles.

  1. Readability; A library must clearly define its grouping so library users can find the related information
  2. Consistency; The classification systems should be applied through the entire library. No preference for which, but one must rule.
  3. Maintainability; The library system should easily be able to expand with new books, without losing its readability and consistency for the Library users.

When we take this library classification system as metaphor to our Mendix Studio Pro, many developers, especially developers on larger systems, use Naming Conventions.

Naming Conventions are sets of guidelines for how to name variables, functions, classes, and other entities in code. They help improve code readability, consistency, and maintainability.

The Mendix Project Explorer represents with Modules the groups of similar topics on shelves. However, within the folder we expect a certain order, so we can rely on the consistency. Since the consistency can point as at the exact spot for our preferred microflow (or book), we either find it to reed (microflow use) or we go to another library to find the book. Or in Mendix we create the missing microflow and cover the missing feature (book).

The Mendix Project Explorer represents with Modules the groups of similar topics on shelves. However, within the folder we expect a certain order, so we can rely on the consistency. Since the consistency can point as at the exact spot for our preferred microflow (or book), we either find it to reed (microflow use) or we go to another library to find the book. Or in Mendix we create the missing microflow and cover the missing feature (book).

Now, let’s turn this thing around and look at what happens with a not (well) functioning readable, consistent and maintainable naming convention in Mendix. If developers have no clear and consistent Convention in Studio Pro, it’s very likely redundancy and a lot of duplicate features will be created. This leads to instability, unnecessary large MPR-file and even worse performance issues. Let alone, the unmanageable insufficient code quality.

If you imagine yourself trying to find a book in a large library with no naming and structure consistency and readability on where to find the books you are interested in, its as frustrated as a Mendix Studio Pro without any naming and structure conventions.

So, my personal advise; Use an existing or create your own naming and structure conventions. It doesn’t really matter how you organize your system, as long as it is Readable, Consistent and maintainable