dsc at swcp.com
Fri Nov 17 00:43:37 CST 2006
On Nov 16, 2006, at 5:33 PM, Hershel Fisch wrote:
> by the way what did you by prefix?
I am contrarian in the use of certain letters at the start of names
to help with readability among team members. (When a customer has
style requirements, I follow those, but for my own work, I use other
ways to help identify variables.)
I tend to write small handlers, about the size of your dollar
formatting function. The whole script fits in one view. I also tend
to write use a lot of "pure" functions, which by their nature do not
use globals and script locals. In those cases those prefixes
separate the handler local variables and the parameters. Well, the
parameters are listed right at the top, so it is easy to tell the
Now, some handers do use script locals. I typically organize my
scripts into sections and have the script locals for that section
right at the top and close to the handers that use them. They are
documented and are described in section notes. They are typically
easy to recognize in handlers even when the declarations have
scrolled off the screen, since the hander often only gets the data or
sets the data. This is probably the weakest place of my argument,
because a person focusing on a handler might not see the declaration
at the top of the section or might expect all script local variables
to be declared at the top of the script.
I very rarely use globals and they are heavily documented.
The syntax identifies properties, so why give them a special prefix?
I use semantic prefixes at times, but those are usually several
letters or even whole words. I prefer to make the name work hard for
readability. Well, they mean something to me.
Folks who want to make sure their scripts are easily maintained by
themselves or others do follow the prefix discipline and I understand
the goals. I just disagree (and throw candy at advocates at
More information about the use-livecode