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-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!uns-out.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!pc03.usenetserver.com!news.flashnewsgroups.com-b7.4zTQh5tI3A!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Suffix _T for types found good
References: <2e9ebb23-a68b-43cf-8871-febcb173f951@56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>
 <4899d2af$0$19731$4d3efbfe@news.sover.net>
 <sbidndoc_aQH0wfVnZ2dnUVZ_tjinZ2d@comcast.com>
 <Pine.WNT.4.64.0808071536330.4692@teor1> <uwsispxj0.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net>
 <efded36d-c0f1-45f9-b1ac-f3575f642ad7@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>
 <9LmdncTBAPGV5jbVnZ2dnUVZ_sTinZ2d@comcast.com>
From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:59:07 -0400
Message-ID: <u8wur6gok.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (windows-nt)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:w8fvjyyV2P/o7LD9PFAuw8R4i3U=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: abuse@flashnewsgroups.com
Organization: FlashNewsgroups.com
X-Trace: 8660348abffb5c74cf41805355
X-Original-Bytes: 2532
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1672
Date: 2008-08-20T07:59:07-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Steve" <nospam_steved94@comcast.net> writes:

>>"Martin" <martin.dowie@btopenworld.com> wrote in message 
>>news:efded36d-c0f1-45f9-b1ac->f3575f642ad7@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> [snip]
>>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. :-(
>
> Actually I think it is clear from the language rules, but...

Huh? The problem is that the language rules forbid this:

Buffer : Buffer;

That is what we would _like_ the language to allow.

> When reading source code it is often important to be able to scan through 
> code quickly and comprehend the meaning.  Coding conventions can make it 
> quicker to recognize things in without reading the text.

So can clear language rules! If we assume that the reader _fully_
understands the language, extra noise like "_Type" or "A_" just get in
the way.

Fortunately, the human mind/brain is good at filtering out such noise,
as long as it is present consistently.

If we try to right Ada code so someone who understands only some
C-like language can read it, then coding conventions might help. I
avoid doing that; one of my goals is to stamp out C coding :).

> For example indenting code uniformly makes it easier to follow.  

That's true, independent of language rules.

-- 
-- Stephe