Shark8 expounded in
news:923f0664-890d-4ca9-9b34-2da64067b068@21g2000prv.googlegro
ups.com: 

>> > I defiantly agree with the Hungarian notation.
>>
>> <tossed cookies> followed by <dry heaves>
>>
>> The type declaration carrys the type information. It does
>> NOT belong in the name (of the variable). �It creates a �
>> maintenance nightmare also -- change the type and all
>> instances of the name must be changed. �
>>
>> BLECH.
> 
> Eh, my mistake, I meant to say "I defiantly agree with you
> on the Hungarian notation."

Ah, ok... you're forgiven. ;-)

>> That is something different. A "file" is a perfectly
>> generic container of information. Do you want to allow
>> your software to decide the format? Or would you prefer
>> the OS to do it instead? �Something must decide.
> 
> Er, I think you misunderstand what I mean by "typed files"
> very often "the software" does NOT & should NOT decide the
> format; if that were the case then "the software" could say
> "my HTML file writer doesn't need ending tags!" or "I don't
> need to write the header for an .ICO file!" which misses
> the whole point of having a specified standard. 
> 
> IOW, the type of a file, having some definition, SHOULD
> ensure that the file has the correct layout... like Access
> ensures that our "pointer" *IS* to a variable of the
> specified type. 

I guess, I don't understand your point. The software creating 
the "content" is doing it in a format, which often varies 
record by record, even in binary (yours is a text example).

> Just because everything copies the thinking neither means
> that the thinking is correct or useful. (Though it doesn't
> mean that it's wrong or useless either.)

Agreed, but you have ask why this is "successful". Usually, 
there are good reasons for it.  Then again, C/C++ is a bad 
counter example. ;-)

Warren