From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,f292779560fb8442 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,af40e09e753872c X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1008e3,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid1008e3,public X-Google-Thread: 10db24,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid10db24,public X-Google-Thread: f8c65,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gidf8c65,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: Steve Branam Subject: Re: Hungarian notation Date: 1996/05/16 Message-ID: <319B693E.41C6@dechub.lkg.dec.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 155153946 references: <4adem2$b5s@mercury.IntNet.net> <4ahka7$o9m@inrou.erno.de> <4n6off$6e2@mikasa.iol.it> <3198F30F.2A2@zurich.ibm.com> <4na9r2$qin@solutions.solon.com> <4naeqp$e2f@druid.borland.com> <4ndb2j$1p0q@uni.library.ucla.edu> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Hub Products Engineering mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.modula2,comp.edu,comp.lang.eiffel x-mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (X11; I; OSF1 V2.1 alpha) Date: 1996-05-16T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Jay Martin wrote: > > Even imporant projects at Microsoft do not use Hungarian notation: > > "Cutler (Mr VMS/NT) and his team reject Hungarian. This pleased Wood, who > called Hungarian "the stupidest thing I'd ever seen." " > > -- From NT project reflection book: Showstopper! by G Pascal Zachary, pg 56. > > Hungarian notation is just another idiotic established concepts > thriving in the computer science field. Isn't CS wonderful? I point > my finger at the totally inattentive and spaced-out > software-incompetent clowns in CS academia. > > Jay A little history, the practice at Digital for code written in Macro and BLISS (the primary languages for OS development in the old days) was to use notation similar to Hungarian. All the primitive data types had a code assigned to them (i.e. "l" for longword, "w" for word, "q" for quadword, etc.). You can see this in the VMS system service programming docs. This was especially useful in assembly language, when you had to make sure you used the right mnemonics for the size operand you were using (so you didn't do a "move word" on a longword-size field!). I found this to be annoying in high-level languages, where I specifically did *not* want to encode implementation details in names. Over the years I have worked with various other people's code that used different styles of coded naming conventions. About the only one I ever found useful was the use of "p" for pointer (which could be extended to "r" for reference in C++) so I would remember that I had a pointer to a thing, not the thing itself. -- Steve Branam Hub Products Engineering 508-486-6043 branam@dechub.lkg.dec.com Digital Equipment Corporation DTN 226-6043