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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.unit0.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Type naming conventions: Any_Foo
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 21:49:38 +0200
Organization: Tidorum Ltd
Message-ID: <h4t5aiFc1vmU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <qs8du6$sg4$1@dont-email.me>
 <f0d2cb32-33fd-4420-bf93-62bf0c005ba0@googlegroups.com>
 <qs8nmg$mm9$1@dont-email.me>
 <f5b3464a-21de-4d75-858a-054178434d54@googlegroups.com>
 <qsbels$msu$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net xv0FhQOqRzShm5dNLiXSZAxEHihH2id7Lpz40KMBlpwqCnBp7i
Cancel-Lock: sha1:JMYYruuSvqe2fSgEGvCkVplW5EQ=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.1
In-Reply-To: <qsbels$msu$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:57659
Date: 2019-12-05T21:49:38+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2019-12-05 19:27, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote:
> On 12/5/19 11:51 AM, AdaMagica wrote:
>>
>> (Broadsword, Catapult, Bow_and_Arrow);
> 
> There are 2 ways to look at them:
> 
> 1. These identify the possible weapons: Weapon_ID
> 2. These are the names of the possible weapons: Weapon_Name

Either of those is itself defining a convention. It seems every 
enumerated type would then get an "_ID" or "_Name" suffix. Or something 
similar.

In my programs, it is very often the case that some object both has a 
type, and has an (internal) identifier, and has an (external) name. So 
the identifiers Weapon_ID and Weapon_Name would be suitable for those 
other types, but not for the Weapon type/concept itself.

> I would even say that those who use naming conventions such as 
> _T[y[p[e]]] are either not S/W engineers or are shirking their duties.

Ouch (I use the "_T" convention).

As an alternative to the "_T" convention, I could consider using longer, 
compound names for formal parameters, for example

   procedure Kill (With_Weapon : in Weapon)

I often use such compounds also with the "_T" convention. Unfortunately, 
I have found that this often leads to rather artificial and 
hard-to-remember compounds, and is even harder to apply sensibly to 
local variables (as opposed to formal parameters). So I go with "_T".

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
       .      @       .