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: a07f3367d7,e55245590c829bef X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!94.75.214.39.MISMATCH!aioe.org!news.tornevall.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jeffrey Carter Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: _Type vs no _Type Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 12:24:13 -0700 Organization: TornevallNET - http://news.tornevall.net Message-ID: References: <86wroy58ff.fsf@gareth.avalon.lan> <86pqup5xfy.fsf@gareth.avalon.lan> <86y69d3rec.fsf@gareth.avalon.lan> <82lj5c5ecm.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <82zktq4n9b.fsf_-_@stephe-leake.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: a741d8768e812198b74d46e3872ca20b Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: c6aec3c794561870ce9f1b84b61652fa X-Complaints-To: abuse@tornevall.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.0.10 X-Complaints-Language: Spoken language is english or swedish - NOT ITALIAN, FRENCH, GERMAN OR ANY OTHER LANGUAGE! In-Reply-To: X-UserIDNumber: 1738 X-Validate-Post: http://news.tornevall.net/validate.php?trace=c6aec3c794561870ce9f1b84b61652fa X-Complaints-Italiano: Non abbiamo padronanza della lingua italiana - se mandate una email scrivete solo in Inglese, grazie X-Posting-User: 0243687135df8c4b260dd4a9a93c79bd Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:16250 Date: 2010-11-05T12:24:13-07:00 List-Id: On 11/05/2010 10:15 AM, Robert A Duff wrote: > > > That doesn't follow -- the fact that I avoid thinking about "3 blanks to > indent" doesn't mean I avoid thinking. Likewise, people who avoid thinking by > using "_Type" do not avoid thinking altogether. Not thinking about indentation is fine. It would also be fine if you never thought about type identifiers. But using _Type doesn't eliminate thinking about type identifiers, just thinking about /good/ type identifiers (the most important kind of thinking). > There are some cases where it is very wrong to come up with "meaningful" > names. In particular, a parameter of a general-purpose subprogram, when > named notation is inappropriate. In such a case, a single-letter name, or (a > variation on) the type name, is exactly right. I disagree very strongly with the single-letter idea. Although I have seen plenty of single-letter parameter names, I have never seen a case where it was appropriate, or where a little thought couldn't come up with good names. -- Jeff Carter "Run away! Run away!" Monty Python and the Holy Grail 58