Variable abuse RANT

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: degibson

Originally posted by: smack Down
m_nThings the "m_n" adds nothing. The fact that a variable is an integer is usually self evident from the code.

I disagree strongly. Lots of objects and primitives can have integer-compatible syntax. I generally think of the 'n' as short for 'number' (some folks just use num), and m_ for member variables is very valuable for figuring out side effects.

as g_p_ please let me know where you work so that I know to avoid any company that came up with a coding notation for one of the worst practices ever.

Use of globals should be made explicit somehow. The very naming of a global variable should invoke pain. Hence the g_. You'll find when you try to disentangle code from its original home that it helps a LOT when use of globals is explicit (if you're unlucky enough to have code that uses globals in the first place).

There's a similar argument for pointers to be made: more pain with p_, etc.

Oh you think of n meaning number. Glad to have the degibson secret decoder ring. You know another very easy way to tell if a variable is a local variable or not? I will let you in on a little secret it local variables are declared in the method.

So not only does the maintenance programmer have to deal with your code using global pointers you're going to help them by making it painful?

 

[degibson]

Originally posted by: smack Down
Oh you think of n meaning number. Glad to have the degibson secret decoder ring.

Mnemonics have psychological merit. If you don't like them and you're not forced to use them by your style guide, don't use them.

You know another very easy way to tell if a variable is a local variable or not? I will let you in on a little secret it local variables are declared in the method.

Code for the weakest coder that will ever look at the code. For all I know, someday some idiot will be looking at the code and won't know is local, what is global, or won't know how to resolve scope for two variables with the same name (perhaps introduced accidentally).

Obviously naming conventions don't mean much for toy programs. In infrastructures measured in MLOCs, however, its a different story.

So not only does the maintenance programmer have to deal with your code using global pointers you're going to help them by making it painful?

I think I've made my position on globals pretty clear: Don't use them. When they're already in use, name them something obvious.

 

[BoberFett]

I feel sorry for anyone who has to read smackdowns code. What an egotistical asshole.

 

[Markbnj]

We have a collegial atmosphere in this forum, and I intend that it will stay that way. Please keep the heavy sarcasm and contemptuous comments off this board. If anyone feels a strong need for that kind of discourse the OT and P&N forums are right around the corner.