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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,1b41412c7bc28c47 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Martin Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Suffix _T for types found good Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 05:12:46 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <2e9ebb23-a68b-43cf-8871-febcb173f951@56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> <4899d2af$0$19731$4d3efbfe@news.sover.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 20.133.0.8 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1219234366 7108 127.0.0.1 (20 Aug 2008 12:12:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:12:46 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=20.133.0.8; posting-account=g4n69woAAACHKbpceNrvOhHWViIbdQ9G User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.1) Gecko/2008070208 Firefox/3.0.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1674 Date: 2008-08-20T05:12:46-07:00 List-Id: On Aug 20, 12:53=A0pm, Stephen Leake wrote: > Martin writes: > > 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. :-( > > But you find the noise of "A_" more acceptable? that seems odd. I > prefer "_Type"; it doesn't try to introduce any more meaning than is > already there from the language rules. > > At least we agree that some noise in the type name is necessary, due > to a wart in the language. > > I use "wart" to mean "ugliness, but not easy to fix, so we can't call > it a bug". > > -- > -- Stephe Yes - it's 3 character less typing! :-) But yes, it's still "ugly" and it would be nice to be able to not have to do anything like this. Cheers -- Martin