[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-198?page=comments#action_12372891 ]
Emmanuel Lecharny commented on DIRMINA-198: ------------------------------------------- I know tat using prefix seems a good idea. I must admit that I have used them a long time ago. I was an adept of hungarian notation a while back (it was in the late 80). I used a lot of m_ for member variables because I hated to use the this.var = var idiom (m_var = var looks like a btter idea). But right now, I do think that it's not a good idea. What is important is not the code you read on article, papers or blog, it's the code you are debugging or writing. This is real code, with real issues, and you need real tools to deal with it. Everything else is pure abstraction... IMHO, and trust me, I've changed my mind more than once !!! > Naming conventions > ------------------ > > Key: DIRMINA-198 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRMINA-198 > Project: Directory MINA > Type: Wish > Versions: 0.9.3 > Reporter: Michael Bauroth > Priority: Trivial > > It would be a great idea to define some naming conventions for the source > code. Especially for new users, but also for all others it can be confusing > to know, if a special variable in a longer method is static or global or > anything else. Naming conventions can generate more readable code and a > quicker programming progress. > In our company we use the following conventions: > static final variables: UPPER_CASE > static variables: sStatic (leading -s, next letter big) > global variables: mMember (leading -m, next letter big) > local (temporary) variables: tTemp (leading -t, next letter big) > parameters: pParam (leading -p, next letter big) > What do you think? -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
