From: Raul Parolari <raulparolari@...>
Date: 2007-11-27T06:23:08+09:00
Subject: Re: False positives in editing data

RichardOnRails wrote:

> I like to know merely by inspection whether a referent denotes an
> integer, a string, a hash or an array of such things.  I'd like to
> avoid "Syntax error" simply because I failed to include a to_s, to_i,
> [] or whatever.  I really can't see why a prefixed lower-case letter
> or two before a camel-case object name can create so much discussion
> irrelevant to the question at hand.

Richard,

  I always found fascinating the issue of 'how we name things', and not 
only for philosophical reasons; personally I think that the horrendous 
amount of time spent to-day in what is called "Testing Dept" is due in 
part to problems like that.

A bad and careless Naming methodology (when there is one!) leads 
(especially in a project where people share code) to subtle errors, 
flawed assumptions, and ultimately to errors (unfortunately, when there 
is somebody put in charge of the 'naming standards', he is often very 
politically correct, but not the brightest guy around, and the result is 
even worse than 'no standards').

One person who wrote something intelligent about this subject is Damian 
Conway in his book "Perl Best Practices" (ok, I will get the usual 
parochial boos for naming that language, but ok, life continues), 
specifically chapter 3 "Naming Conventions".

Even if the examples are on Perl syntax, the substance goes beyond. He 
suggests something different than your approach; the name should 
indicate not so much the class/type, but the MEANING of the data 
structure; for example (of course I will not use Perl syntax, and avoid 
the examples that make sense for Perl only):

# scalars
running_total  games_count  # (rather than 'total','count')

# booleans
is_valid   has_end_tag   loading_finished

# arrays
events     handlers     unknowns
# the iteration var
event      handler      unknown

# hashes
title_of    count_for    sales_from    isbn_from

He even discusses the role of 'nouns' and 'adjectives' in names.. (a 
delight to read!).

The emphasis is in the MEANING of the data, not on the 'class/type': do 
you see? but the objective is similar to yours: grant somebody looking 
at code of somebody else (translated: ourselves 6 months later!) at 
least a hope to vaguely understand what is going on!

You may want to glance at it, if you find that approach of interest.

Raul

  Names are but noise and smoke,
  obscuring heavenly light

  Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, "Faust: Part I"

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.