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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7eaf9f2597de2259 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-08 07:59:18 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!hammer.uoregon.edu!skates!not-for-mail From: Stephen Leake Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: on package naming, should the word "_pkg" be part of it? Date: 08 Oct 2001 10:51:13 -0400 Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Message-ID: References: <9pif1o01btl@drn.newsguy.com> <3BBD12F1.9BED0B70@acm.org> <3BC0B1D4.21C79A8@acm.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: anarres.gsfc.nasa.gov Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: skates.gsfc.nasa.gov 1002552781 19058 128.183.220.71 (8 Oct 2001 14:53:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: dscoggin@cne-odin.gsfc.nasa.gov NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Oct 2001 14:53:01 GMT User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13927 Date: 2001-10-08T14:53:01+00:00 List-Id: Jeffrey Carter writes: > I was simply making the point that those who think sticking _Type on > every type name or _Package on every package name is a Good Thing should > also think sticking _Procedure on every procedure name, _Parameter on > every parameter name, and such are also Good Things. Hmm. Stating what I "should" think is not very productive; better to ask what I _do_ think, and why. I use _Type. The reason is that types and objects share the same namespace, yet the most reasonable name for an object and a type is the same: type Car is record ... end record; Car : Car; This is natural, but illegal. The easiest (for _me_, not for everyone!) way to resolve it is to add some "noise" to either the object or the type. Since the object name will appear more often than the type, I add noise to the type: type Car_Type is record ... end record; Car : Car_Type; > Then I threw in mode and type information to make it even more > unworkable. There is simply no reason to add more noise; Ada is fine just the way it is. > These conventions (and The_ on every parameter name is the same > thing, only worse) are really work-arounds to having to think about > names. No, they are work-arounds for a language design choice; types and objects could have distinct name spaces. I'm not clear why they don't, but I don't spend much time worrying about it. > While not thinking is popular, it is not a good way to develop > software. This is true. > I'm disheartened that only 2 of us find my proposal unsatisfactory. I agree with Brian's response here; your first post was simply not worth responding to. You need to listen to what we are saying, not just tell us we are wrong. -- -- Stephe