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: f8c65,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gidf8c65,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 1008e3,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid1008e3,public X-Google-Thread: 10db24,30e368bdb3310fe5 X-Google-Attributes: gid10db24,public From: jos@and.nl (Jos A. Horsmeier) Subject: Re: Hungarian notation Date: 1996/05/24 Message-ID: <4o3qih$25j@beta.nedernet.nl>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 156482510 references: <4adem2$b5s@mercury.IntNet.net> <4n6off$6e2@mikasa.iol.it> <3198F30F.2A2@zurich.ibm.com> <4nsg3f$liu@solutions.solon.com> <31a3b322.442404233@sqarc> <4o35bu$ut8@sol.caps.maine.edu> content-type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 organization: AND Operations Research B.V. mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.modula2,comp.edu,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1996-05-24T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <4o35bu$ut8@sol.caps.maine.edu>, slary61@maine.maine.edu wrote: |dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: |> Hungarian notation is certainly a remarkable demonstration of how few |> people have learned and understood data abstraction. What's most |> interesting is how difficult it is for its advocates to see this point, |> but I suppose that is not surprising. If you never understood what |> abstraction is about, then of course adopting a notation that destroys it |> will not concern you. |Perhaps Bill Gates will be contacting you for that explanation. |Although the examples you cite support your opinion, the bottom |line is that some of the largest software developers in the world |insist on code using Hungarian Notation. | |Why? I don't know the answer to that question, but your last remark made me wonder: do these 'large software developers' produce better code using this Hungarian notation? With 'better' I mean 'more efficient', 'more readable', 'more maintainable' ... IMHO Hungarian notation is just a bunch of hulla baloo; it doesn't add anything to the textual representation of the semantics of a piece of code, i.e. it doesn't make things more readable. While I do agree that people find: 'All humans are mortal; Aristotle is human; so Aristotle is mortal.' more readable than: A(x): { h(x) -> m(x) } , h(a) --> m(a) I don't think that: 'All p_lt_humans are prop_mortal' lt_Aristotle is lt_human; so lt_Aristotle is prop_mortal', where 'p_' stands for plural, 'lt_' denotes a living thing and 'prop_' is a property, adds much clarity to the understanding of what was actually said in the first (unreadable?) line ... But this is all IMHO of course; if people want to use HN, I can't blame them. All I beg for is, that they should apply it consistently, so I would be able to strip all those prefixes off using a simple awk script or even using sed ... ;-) kind regards, Jos aka jos@and.nl -- Qgi nicws nt swaj ri rgw eufgr>