Re: Suffix _T for types found good

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"Peter C. Chapin" <pcc482719@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:4899d2af$0$19731$4d3efbfe@news.sover.net...
> amado.alves@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Regarding "_T" vs. "_Type" I am convinced the former is better but I
>> have to leave the advocacy for later. Or for others ;-)
>
> Personally I prefer _Type. Yes it is more verbose but it follows the 
> convention of using fully spelled out words for things. For access types I 
> have used _Pointer. As in
>
> type Integer_Pointer is access all Integer;
>
> It mostly seems to work for me.

When we designed Claw, we tried to use "_Type" consistently. Along with a 
number of other standard prefixes and suffixes so that the different 
packages had a consistent feel. I'm not sure we quite succeeded (we didn't 
create a tool to check the names, and we probably should have).

                                Randy.