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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,63a41ccea0fc803a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "John G. Volan" <johnvolan@sprintmail.com>
Subject: Re: Naming of Tagged Types and Associated Packages
Date: 1998/09/06
Message-ID: <35F2AEEA.94D37DFF@sprintmail.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 388428274
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <m37m0suor4.fsf@mheaney.ni.net> <Ex7H8r.HGq@syd.csa.com.au>
 <Pine.BSF.3.96.980805092758.8504A-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>
 <6qfp80$p0u$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <m3pveclhna.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>
 <35CD0A8E.21D64380@sprintmail.com> <m3d8abkuv6.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>
 <35CEBAAF.B9B82820@sprintmail.com> <m367f9rhdj.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>
 <35F0CAF2.9B447FD2@sprintmail.com> <m3soi62hkp.fsf@mheaney.ni.net>
X-Posted-Path-Was: not-for-mail
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-ELN-Date: Sun Sep  6 08:49:06 1998
Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: johnvolan@sprintmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-09-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Matthew Heaney wrote:
> 
> My philosophy is to use the name _Type only as a last resort, as it has
> a sort of generic quality to it.  

Funny, I'd say its precisely this quality that should make _Type the
*first* resort! :-)  It's so generally applicable as a type-marking
suffix one might as well use it everywhere...

> That sometimes turns out to be useful,
> as in the example above.  Some guys name generic formal types _Type, for
> exactly that reason.

I'd say, don't treat generic formal types any differently than normal
types: Mark 'em all with "_Type"!  One nice feature of Cohen style is
that it results in a clearly-readable distinction between generic formal
parameter passing and subprogram parameter passing, which otherwise are
syntactically identical (in Ada):

  -- Generic formal parameter passing:
  package Doctor_Lists is new
    Lists (Item_Type => Doctors.Doctor_Type);
           -- it's clear that the parameter 
           -- being passed is a _type_
  ...
  Doctor_List : Doctors_Lists.List_Type;
  Doctor : Doctors.Doctor_Type;
  ...
  Doctor_Lists.Append (List => Doctor_List, Item => Doctor);
                       -- it's clear that the parameters
                       -- being passed are _objects_

-- 
indexing
   description: "Signatures for John G. Volan"
   self_plug: "Ex Ada guru", "Java 1.1 Certified", "Eiffelist wannabe"
   two_cents: "Java would be even cooler with Eiffel's assertions/DBC, %
              %generics, true MI, feature adaptation, uniform access, %
              %selective export, expanded types, etc., etc..."
class JOHN_VOLAN_SIGNATURE inherit SIGNATURE invariant
   disclaimer: not (opinion implies employer.opinion)
end -- class JOHN_VOLAN_SIGNATURE