🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <60KgWmb-3RB@herold.franken.de>, Joachim Durchholz
<jhd@herold.franken.de> writes
>andy@wndrwrks.demon.co.uk wrote 05.01.96 on Re: Hungarian notation:
>
>> In article <4cd8fc$oud@news.manawatu.gen.nz>, Chris Tutty
>> <ctutty@manawatu.gen.nz> writes
>>
>> Consider also that variable names may be misleading anyway. In that
>> sense there's no great difference between
>>
>>         someProc(MyString)
>>
>> and
>>
>>         someProc(pszMyString)
>>
>> either could quite happily refer to any other data type.
>>
>
>This example does not occur in real life. Or rather, it better should not!
>Anybody using meaningless names like "MyString" should be thrown out of  
>the programming business. Depending on the actual semantics of "someProc",  
>the parameter should be called "Message" or "Options" or "ParserInput" or  
>whatever.

The semantics of someProc might by that it's a function to reverse the
characters of a string in place in which case (psz)MyString would be a
quite reasonable argument name (albeit not one which I would use).

My intention was to draw attention to the fact that HN is a form of
documentation which in some ways is similar to indentation, choice of
variable names and use of comments; specifically, if you use names,
comments and indentation which don't accurately reflect what the program
does you are guilty of a crime which is not greatly different from using
HN incorrectly. Any redundant decoration which a language tolerates is
potentially misleading.

  Andy Armstrong                  WonderWorks
  Phone/fax: 01665 602868 Mobile: 0860 922719