Re: Suffix _T for types found good

[Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com>]

On Aug 20, 4:59 am, Stephen Leake <stephen_le...@stephe-leake.org>
wrote:
> "Steve" <nospam_steve...@comcast.net> writes:
> >>"Martin" <martin.do...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
>
> >>I've used (and mandated) the "A_"/"An_" prefixes on a few projects and
> >>it does work quite well and read fine.
>
> >>I'll put my hand up and admit I _hate_ the noise of "_Type" - it
> >>really ought to be clear and unambiguous from language rules but
> >>isn't. :-(
>
> > Actually I think it is clear from the language rules, but...
>
> Huh? The problem is that the language rules forbid this:
>
> Buffer : Buffer;
>
> That is what we would _like_ the language to allow.

Yeah, earlier on in this thread I was thinking about whether it would
have been possible for Ada to have separate namespaces for types and
other non-type entities without ambiguities.  Attributes make this
impossible.  Offhand, I'm not sure whether context is always
sufficient to distinguish types from non-types, other than with
attributes.  Not that any of this is particularly relevant, except to
those who might be thinking of designing new languages....

                                -- Adam