home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca!not-for-mail
- From: c2a192@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca (Kazimir Kylheku)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.modula2
- Subject: Re: Hungarian notation
- Date: 30 Jan 1996 13:24:10 -0800
- Organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
- Message-ID: <4em29qINN39r@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca>
- References: <30C40F77.53B5@swsbbs.com> <Pine.HPP.3.91.960124153551.24374C-100000@zeezrom.cs.byu.edu> <4e7ifl$et3@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> <Pine.HPP.3.91.960129133429.8419C-100000@foggy.cs.byu.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca
-
- In article <Pine.HPP.3.91.960129133429.8419C-100000@foggy.cs.byu.edu>,
- Douglas Evan Cook <cookd@cs.byu.edu> wrote:
- >Probably so. In that case, you probably shouldn't. But the designer of
- >the ADT needs some mechanism to keep the data formats maintainable. I'm
- >sure I'm missing your point, but it is clear that you are also missing
- >mine. How much clearer can I make this? SOMEBODY HAS TO MAKE THE
- >ADT's! And when you have thousands of different ADT's in a library, you
- >need some unifying typedefs. So TYPEDEFS ARE NOT "USELESS" OR BAD CODING
-
- Oh really? What if you are working in a language that doesn't have the
- "typedef" keyword? I guess you are up the creek, since you obviously need some
- unifying typedefs and your compler ain't got none.
- --
-
-