[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: scope, design patterns?
- From: Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@...>
- Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 07:47:43 +0300
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 07:36, David Manura <dm.lua@math2.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 10:04 PM, Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Note that we do not use Hungarian notation, mentioned by David, here,
>> we use type validation instead where it is important:
>> https://github.com/lua-aplicado/lua-aplicado/blob/master/lua-aplicado/filesystem.lua#L63-65
> I think you do use some apps Hungarian notation. For example, your
> file names are typically postfixed by "filename" like this:
> local update_file = function(out_filename, new_data, force)
> arguments("string", out_filename, .....)
> .....
I'm always forgetting about Apps notation. Too used to the other kind
— which is the red flag for me.
Anyway my naming style is not cryptic (or I try to keep it so), so it
does not deserve to be called Hungarian :-)
(Formally, you're right, of course, that is Apps Hungarian notation.)
Alexander.
- References:
- scope, design patterns?, Patrick Mc(avery
- Re: scope, design patterns?, Tomas Guisasola Gorham
- Re: scope, design patterns?, Patrick Mc(avery
- Re: scope, design patterns?, Alexander Gladysh
- Re: scope, design patterns?, David Manura