Re: Type naming conventions: Any_Foo

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On 2019-12-05 21:03, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote:
> On 12/5/19 6:45 PM, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>>
>> 1. Formal generic types. They are customarily named XXX_Type.
> 
> Well chosen names for generic formal types do not end with _Type. The 
> PragmAda Reusable Components have many generic formal types, none of 
> which end with _Type.

Ada standard library uses _Type, e.g.

generic
    type Element_Type (<>) is private;
    with function "=" (Left, Right : Element_Type) return Boolean is <>;
package Ada.Containers.Indefinite_Holders

As I said, the rationale is that there is no meaningful name for 
Element_Type in the problem space. There is no problem space at all. 
Indefinite_Holders is a helper package so general that considered in 
isolation it has no meaning.

>>        -- I don't want access type, I am required to have it
> 
> Please provide examples of being required to have an access type.

There are lots of cases in Ada, you certainly should know that. As a 
practical example GtkAda declares all widget types twice:

    type Gtk_Button_Record is ...
    type Gtk_Button is access all Gtk_Button_Record'Class;

The suffix _Record is an equivalent to _Type.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de