Re: standards
- From: Michael Thomas <mhthomas@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:37:28 -0700 (PDT)
Hi,
--- Rachel Carmichael <wisernet100@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
> One thing I've finally decided is fairly useless is
> the idea, within
> naming standards, of identifying the type of object
> by a prefix. Who
> cares?
>
...
Good point for discussion. Is it a degree of how much
detail?
1) I prefer to prefix my PL/SQL function/procedure
parameters with 'p_' to help with code maintenance and
error prevention.
Because, a mis-understanding can arise when a
parameter name matches a name in a SQL query. The 'p_'
helps in these few cases.
2) I think its well documented that complex variable
prefixes *hurt* understanding of code. I typically use
simple variable prefixes to show basic scope.
I had *one* link with examples of simple PL/SQL
variable prefixes, and a *second* link which argued
against all PL/SQL prefixes (with the caveat to check
the case #1 mentioned above). Both links were great.
If I can find these two links again today or tomorrow
I will post them to the list.
Regards,
Mike Thomas
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Other related posts:
