Phango - questions

[Julio César Carrascal Urquijo]

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.

I'm in the m_ camp but I use it to flag the intent not the scope. I want 
a visual clue when I'm modifying the state of the object because I'm 
terrible at following state changes in my head (Specially with events 
and multi-threading).

For static members I use g_ because they're simply global variables.

Stating the scope is (IMHO) a pretty lame reason to add a prefix. The 
compiler is better at that than I am. It's the same difference between 
Apps Hungarian and Systems Hungarian: One it's quite useful the other is 
just silly.

-- 
Julio César Carrascal Urquijo
http://jcesar.artelogico.com/