Re: Naming Conventions?

On 23 Apr, 23:30, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:

> Who considers hungarian notation bad? And why?

I do (and strongly so, our office coding standards are merciless over avoiding it)

This is because I now work on platforms where it's merely duplicating the language's own features. Duplication is bad, because it can't add, it takes effort and it can only possibly confusingly contradict. When I used C, C++ or VB, it had its benefits.

For SQL, we already have some data typing, but hardly much of it. Where "Hungarian like" conventions can still offer something is when you ned to express a type system that's deeper than what's available automatically. Aspects like ASCII-only / UTF encoding of strings, strings vs. HTML-encoded strings, strings vs. URIs, or (perhaps most importantly) user-tainted input vs. untainted can still be worth having. Received on Tue Apr 24 2007 - 13:21:16 CEST