New Variable Naming Standards
-
I'd like to recommend some new variable namig standards. For this tutorial I'll use an example pulled from one of my recent projects. intValReCoRDCouNT1rjt 1: The first 3 letters are the type. 2: The second 3 letters are if it's a reference or value type. 3: The third set of letters - all capital letters (except for vowels) - is the name. 4: The numeric digit is what I usually vote on all of Dalek Dave's posts. 5: My initials (so we know what programmer made the variable). The great thing about these variable names is that they also work well as passwords. I call it Code Project Notation.
-
Let's reduce it to the two digit year to save space. After all, including the century digits is redundant. :-D
Let's reduce it to the two digit year to save space. That's what they said before they knew better...
regards Torsten When I'm not working
-
I'd like to recommend some new variable namig standards. For this tutorial I'll use an example pulled from one of my recent projects. intValReCoRDCouNT1rjt 1: The first 3 letters are the type. 2: The second 3 letters are if it's a reference or value type. 3: The third set of letters - all capital letters (except for vowels) - is the name. 4: The numeric digit is what I usually vote on all of Dalek Dave's posts. 5: My initials (so we know what programmer made the variable). The great thing about these variable names is that they also work well as passwords. I call it Code Project Notation.
I'd like to add a prefix m_ for member variables:
m_intValReCoRDCouNT1rjtto add a bit more security we should make the naming longer - one never knows, the name might already been taken.regards Torsten When I'm not working
-
MehGerbil wrote:
intValReCoRDCouNT1rjt1998
In which year variable was created. :rolleyes:
Regards, Hiren. -"I don't know, I don't care, and it doesn't make any difference".
Excellent! +52012mwh
VS2010/Atmel Studio 6.0 ToDo Manager Extension
Version 3.0 now available. There is no place like 127.0.0.1 -
I'd like to recommend some new variable namig standards. For this tutorial I'll use an example pulled from one of my recent projects. intValReCoRDCouNT1rjt 1: The first 3 letters are the type. 2: The second 3 letters are if it's a reference or value type. 3: The third set of letters - all capital letters (except for vowels) - is the name. 4: The numeric digit is what I usually vote on all of Dalek Dave's posts. 5: My initials (so we know what programmer made the variable). The great thing about these variable names is that they also work well as passwords. I call it Code Project Notation.
-
Let's reduce it to the two digit year to save space. After all, including the century digits is redundant. :-D
Will it not lead to the Y0.1K problem, like the Year 2000 problem?
-
I'd like to recommend some new variable namig standards. For this tutorial I'll use an example pulled from one of my recent projects. intValReCoRDCouNT1rjt 1: The first 3 letters are the type. 2: The second 3 letters are if it's a reference or value type. 3: The third set of letters - all capital letters (except for vowels) - is the name. 4: The numeric digit is what I usually vote on all of Dalek Dave's posts. 5: My initials (so we know what programmer made the variable). The great thing about these variable names is that they also work well as passwords. I call it Code Project Notation.
-
I'd like to recommend some new variable namig standards. For this tutorial I'll use an example pulled from one of my recent projects. intValReCoRDCouNT1rjt 1: The first 3 letters are the type. 2: The second 3 letters are if it's a reference or value type. 3: The third set of letters - all capital letters (except for vowels) - is the name. 4: The numeric digit is what I usually vote on all of Dalek Dave's posts. 5: My initials (so we know what programmer made the variable). The great thing about these variable names is that they also work well as passwords. I call it Code Project Notation.
I can go with 1, 2, 4, and five - silly, but I can imagine a tortured, past-plagued mind coming up with perfectly fine reasons. I'm curious, though, what's the motivation behind the casing rule of 3. They didn't want to shell out for an obfuscator?
FILETIME to time_t
| FoldWithUs! | sighist | WhoIncludes - Analyzing C++ include file hierarchy -
Sure. I usually solve problems by wrapping them up in a warp field and keeping the antimatter contained. I only wish I had Kirk's ability to talk computers to death.
At least artificial intelligence already is superior to natural stupidity
-
Let's reduce it to the two digit year to save space. That's what they said before they knew better...
regards Torsten When I'm not working
-
I can go with 1, 2, 4, and five - silly, but I can imagine a tortured, past-plagued mind coming up with perfectly fine reasons. I'm curious, though, what's the motivation behind the casing rule of 3. They didn't want to shell out for an obfuscator?
FILETIME to time_t
| FoldWithUs! | sighist | WhoIncludes - Analyzing C++ include file hierarchy
