Re: standards

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 http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Other related posts: