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: 103376,2afac1a4161c7f35
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com>
Subject: Re: Distinguishing type names from other identifiers
Date: 1998/01/26
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980126142622.22503A-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 319483080
References: 
 <mheaney-ya023680001001981110500001@news.ni.net><199801121523.QAA06527@basement.replay.com><mheaney-ya023680001201981007080001@news.ni.net><Pine.BSF.3.96.980112140520.25032A-100000@shell5.ba.best.com><dewar.884697067@merv>
 <01bd2078$a449b460$41fd82c1@xhv46.dial.pipex.com><pdx3eiq648m.fsf@vesuri.Helsinki.FI>
 <6v0LMGAjwIw0Ews0@dowie-cs.demon.co.uk><mheaney-ya023680002501980906220001@news.ni.net>
 <n5rs5FAStOz0Ew2+@dowie-cs.demon.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Trace: 885854771 27717 bpr  206.184.139.132
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-01-26T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Martin M Dowie wrote:
> In article <mheaney-ya023680002501980906220001@news.ni.net>, Matthew
> Heaney <mheaney@ni.net> writes
> >
> >Be consistant with the style used in the RM.  If you ever have a question
> >about how to name something, then flip through the RM (or ask me :-) to see
> >how the RM does it, and name it that way.  Don't make up a convention
> >because you think it's more "oo-like."
> 
> I'm not making it up - this is the standard at the company i'm currently
> working for... i prefer not to see '_type' myself - if it made any sense
> we'd haev '_procedure', '_function' etc...

Where it would make sense is with an access to a function/procedure, so
I might declare

	type Callback_Function is access function( ... yadda yadda ... ) 
	                                 return Return_Type;

which looks fine to me, though I might use _Func instead, so my
declarations would be 

	Foo_Callback, Bar_Callback : Callback_Func;

or just 

	Callback : Callback_Func;

> not sure about that - i know _lots_ of engineers who would add a '_type'
> no matter what language they are using "'coz we've always done it that
> way" - i'm sure we've all heard such reasoned arguement in our time...

Old straw man raises his ugly head. I might not add "_Type" in a language
that didn't (usually) have type declarations for variables , whether or
not it was statically typed (Lisp or ML, for example). Its a fine 
convention, IMO of course, in Ada.

I believe I understand the arguments against suffixes on types, but it
seems you don't understand the arguments in favor of them. It has nothing
to do with a misguided notion of OO-ness or inertia. 

-- Brian