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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 2002:aed:35e5:: with SMTP id d34mr7010342qte.298.1575543094996;
        Thu, 05 Dec 2019 02:51:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:51ca:: with SMTP id d10mr5811839oth.76.1575543094774;
 Thu, 05 Dec 2019 02:51:34 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!g89no7558315qtd.0!news-out.google.com!w29ni139qtc.0!nntp.google.com!g89no7558306qtd.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 02:51:34 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <qs8nmg$mm9$1@dont-email.me>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=185.22.143.114;
 posting-account=rmHyLAoAAADSQmMWJF0a_815Fdd96RDf
NNTP-Posting-Host: 185.22.143.114
References: <qs8du6$sg4$1@dont-email.me>
 <f0d2cb32-33fd-4420-bf93-62bf0c005ba0@googlegroups.com>
 <qs8nmg$mm9$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <f5b3464a-21de-4d75-858a-054178434d54@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Type naming conventions: Any_Foo
From: AdaMagica <christ-usch.grein@t-online.de>
Injection-Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:51:34 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:57654
Date: 2019-12-05T02:51:34-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Of all of these schemes, my favorite is
Package Foos
Type    Any_Foo
Object  Foo

This is tightly related to the discussion predefied types vs. user defined types. It's not always easy, ahem it's often difficult to find good names.

I think finding good names and spending time on this is well spent effort.

I do not know who posted this example a long time ago, but I like it:

Do not use abbreviations. Good names make a program understandable. What is Wpn?

type Weapon_Type is (Broadsword, Catapult, Bow_and_Arrow);

procedure Attack_Using (Weapon: Weapon_Type);

Weapon: Weapon_Type;

Attack_Using (Weapon => Catapult);  -- a bit talkative
Attack_Using (Catapult);  -- good only with positional association

versus

type Weapon is (Broadsword, Catapult, Bow_and_Arrow);

procedure Attack (Using: Weapon);

My_Weapon, Foes_Weapon: Weapon;

Attack (Using => Catapult);  -- good only with named association
Attack (Catapult);  -- Do we attack the catapult or what?