I had the same experience. I *always* used an underscore prefix and when we switched to StyleCop it was the one thing that bugged me and nearly turned the rule off but decided to try and live with StyleCop standards for a few weeks rather than explain why we had one exception. Now I can't imagine having to put an underscore and when I see code using it I think of it as "old-fashioned". Weird but true.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Davy J Sent: Sunday, 31 January 2010 12:52 a.m. To: ausDotNet Subject: Re: Friday debate: underscore prefix on instance variable The project that I just finished had all the stylecop rules and code analysis turned on, the first 2 - 3 weeks were a real pain in the arse but after a while you get used to it. The code was much more readable, no ambiguities about the private field name and scoping took care of it. If you follow the rules exactly it's impossible to have this happen: public int id; public int ID { get; set; } the coding rules just won't let you do that so your argument about other languages not being able to read the class definition is null and void. Now to convert my own project to the same standard, 2856 errors to go......... Davy.
