>>>>Can abyone see why this guy was let go?
>>>
>>>Was he the one who came up with the stp*sub* naming convention?
>>
>>in my book adhering to this convention makes refactoring via breaking out own subclasses much easier -
>>works great if you are up against a couple of 1000+ lines long functions from a previous dev who left the company...
>
>I agree about the advantage given by name sequencing when refactoring. For a work in progress, it looks pretty clever to me. The only downside is that, after the break-up, the sequence of steps has to be enforced by the programmer, whereas before, it was enforced by the program itself. As an example in the code sample, stp2sub40 is invoked before stp2sub10, which apparently breaks the sequence imposed by the naming convention.

Agreed, naming methods after the order is not the optimal way - but ok if it is a work in progress where the code is cut and partioned - finding a better name is easier when you see how often the code is reused and duplicates are getting eliminated. Such names should never be used when creating the code yourself.

>... Those comments can be removed easily. If he put that in a messagebox, it would have been a different story:). Disclaimer: I am not a religious person. Neither do I drink milk in the morning, nor do I consider this the start of a conversation about religion.

So no chance of a religuos conversation about milk in the coffee ;-)