Re: Suffix _T for types found good

["Steve" <nospam_steved94@comcast.net>]

"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.

I go with _Type too, but for pointers I go with _Acc.

For years the convention at work (I'm not sure where it came from) was to 
precede type names with a lower case "a" or "an" so a declaration would be 
something like:

  index : anIndex;
  buffer : aBuffer;

Since I used the convention for years I can say it helped readability a lot, 
but every once in a while I did run into cases where I would want a variable 
name to start with a or an and would have to choose something different, or 
accept some "different" looking code.

Regards,
Steve