Phango - questions

[Sean Kelly]

Walter Bright wrote:
> Robert Fraser wrote:
>> Why do private members need to be differentiated typographically?
> 
> I kinda wonder the same thing. Private members are limited in scope, and 
> the more limited in scope a name is, the less important it is to follow 
> a special naming convention.

Class implementations occupy more than one screen's worth of text, while 
functions (typically) do not.  Labeling member data indicates at a 
glance that the data is at class scope and not module or global scope. 
I find that doing so serves as a useful indicator for determining 
function side-effects and indicating whether mutexes and such are 
required.  I label static members separately for the same reason.


Sean