Re: Tagged type naming convention

[Jacob Sparre Andersen <jacob@jacob-sparre.dk>]

Jere <jhb.chat@gmail.com> writes:

> I was looking at an older document for a naming convention for tagged
> types and stumbled upon J.P. Rosen's "A Naming Convention for Classes
> in Ada 9X" [1].  It's pretty intriguing and, even though it was
> developed for 9X, it has applicability in the current Ada revision.
> However, I haven't really seen it employed in any of the libraries
> I've messed with.  Keep in mind, my experience with external libraries
> is limited.  I was curious if this style is something that a lot of
> people use and had some input on.  Is it still in use?  Pros/Cons
> based on experience using it?

It is definitely still in use.  I use it.

> One concern for it is consistency.  It was presented with tagged types
> in mind, but even non tagged types provide inheritance and primitive
> operations that can be overridden.  Should it be applied to those as
> well if used?

Only if you stick to the pattern of a single type per package.

I only use Jean-Pierres's naming pattern for the primary type in a
package.  Any "helper" types have more arbitrary names.

Jean-Pierre's naming pattern is one of the two suggested in the Ada 95
Quality and Style Guide.

Greetings,

Jacob
-- 
Better save than sorry!