Re: Beginners question: Compound types, how-to?

["Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>]

Le Thu, 04 Nov 2010 06:18:42 +0100, Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com> a  
écrit:

> Somewhere on this thread, a while back, someone brought up the
> question about why the Standard numeric types (Integer, Float, etc)
> don't have a "_Type" suffix as an argument against such a suffix.
May be this was me in a previous thread (not this one), I remember I  
opened a thread about this question last year.

> After some thought it dawned on me that because the name like integer
> & natural are the names of the [mathematical, nor programming]
I do not know the reason, but it appears this is less a trouble with  
Integer and the like, as it is unlikely some one will think of it as an  
entity name.

This is more likely to occur with a type like String, but Line and Text  
may be good alternative entity names for that case.

The more a type is complex, the more it will hold a semantic, and the more  
its name is going to be the same as a names of choice for entities.

Integer means really nothing : not a measure, not a count, not a quantity,  
not anything. Then after, if you define a derived type, like Weight_Type,  
Cardinal_Type, etc, these Weight and Cardinal really means something, so  
their variables have a strong potential to be of the same name. No chance  
this will occur with a name like Integer. Integer is too much simple and  
basic to hold any semantic (it has specifications, not semantic).

There is also the special case of Character the OP introduced  
(synonymous). This one is another story.

-- 
Si les chats miaulent et font autant de vocalises bizarres, c’est pas pour  
les chiens.