[AccessD] Goodbye Leszynski/Reddick?

Hungarian prefix perhaps, not suffix?

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Arthur Fuller <fuller.artful at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Gustav,
>
> Although I've used Leszynski/Reddick conventions in the past, several years
> ago I abandoned them, in favour of what I call Hungarian suffix notation.
> It's basically the same, but rather than prefixes I use suffixes. My
> justification for this is simple: signal to noise ratio. It is inefficient
> to me to have to ignore the first three letters of any given object name.
> Further, objects don't sort intelligently when prefixes are used.
>
> I've even gone a little beyond that, in my use of suffixes. Specifically,
> queries/views:
>
> Queries use these suffixes:
> SalesReports_qs         'query Select
> CustomersTotals_qu    'query Update
> Invoices_qa                 'query append
> TempTable_qd             'query delete
>
> Views use similar suffixes, substituting "v" for "q".
>
> Forms use suffixes such as "_frm" (normal form), "_sfm" (subform), "_dlg"
> (dialog), and "_ds" (datasheet).
>
> When working with a SQL back end, I do the something similar. My typical
> suffix is "_ap" (application procedure), and within the name itself I
> always begin with the principal table(s), especially in the case of sprocs
> that update the data. It's strictly a matter of choice, but my preference
> is "object-action" rather than "action-object": I won't use "UpdateOrder"
> for example, but rather "OrderUpdate". Again, objects sort more naturally
> this way.
>
> Ultimately, I suppose that whichever scheme you employ, consistency is the
> watchword. When working on a project that will be maintained by someone
> else when I'm gone, I include a module called "_Conventions" that consists
> of nothing but comments, and describes the conventions outlined above.
> ------
> Thanks for the code, Gustav. I've copied it into my OneNote notebook of VBA
> code, with full credit to you of course.
>
> /Arthur
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:44 AM, Gustav Brock <gustav at cactus.dk> wrote:
>
> > Hi all
> >
> > I had to write a new VBA project from scratch, and given how you
> > conventionally program in C# and that Microsoft never has applied the
> > Leszynski/Reddick naming convention (just study the parameter names of
> the
> > built-in functions), I thought it might be time for a change, if for
> > nothing else to type less.
> >
> > So I did, and I felt well. Now Key can be the name (string) of a key,
> Keys
> > an array of keys, and Value the value of a key, and DataCollection is a
> > collection of data.
> >
> > Much to my surprise, having used Leszynski/Reddick "always" it didn't
> > cause any problems to me - in fact I find the code just a little bit
> easier
> > to read.
> > That may be me, and we all have our preferences, but have a look and
> judge
> > for yourself:
> >
> >     https://github.com/CactusData/VBA.CVRAPI
> >
> > Now, this is code only - no tables, no queries - and that may be where
> > trouble is; it is very convenient from the name alone to know whether you
> > deal with a table or a query, even though a table and a query cannot
> share
> > the same name.
> > I've seen, that in T-SQL you often prefix views with a V, so Customer is
> a
> > table and VCustomer is some query/view of table Customer. So a simple
> > prefix of Q for query names could be used. I haven't sorted that out yet.
> >
> > /gustav
> --
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>