Suffix _T for types found good
- From: amado.alves@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 07:58:18 -0700 (PDT)
I just want to offer my experience on the old issue of adding a suffix
_T to all type names.
In my experience it is good.
In a large (50KLOC) industrial experience of analysing Ada 95 source
(written by others) this convention clearly helped understanding the
source and writing test cases. This was a team work.
I started using the convention in the personal process also, and also
experienced improvement. In the personal process, I particularly like
that:
(1) I don't have to think up "good" type names that sometimes simply
do not exist; too often it is very difficult or impossible to come up
with a good pattern of names for the type, the object, the array,
etc.; with _T at least one term is removed from the equation
(2) I can promptly write things like
Index : Index_T;
procedure Proc (Index : Index_T);
etc.
For access types I have been writing _Ptr_T but I'm not 100% happy.
Regarding "_T" vs. "_Type" I am convinced the former is better but I
have to leave the advocacy for later. Or for others ;-)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Suffix _T for types found good
- From: Maciej Sobczak
- Re: Suffix _T for types found good
- From: Jeffrey R. Carter
- Re: Suffix _T for types found good
- From: Niklas Holsti
- Re: Suffix _T for types found good
- From: Peter C. Chapin
- Re: Suffix _T for types found good
- Prev by Date: Re: Larger matrices
- Next by Date: Re: Larger matrices
- Previous by thread: Larger matrices
- Next by thread: Re: Suffix _T for types found good
- Index(es):