>  (Since the "namespace bid = boost::io::detail;" ought to be somewhere in
> the beginning of the file or the beginning of the function where it's 
> used,
> it ought to be hard to miss, so it's easy for the reader to know what it
> means.)

Depends how many namespace typedefs you're using, it could easily become 
awkward to remember or check every one in a file.  Modern IDEs show the full 
type definition just by hovering over the code (which you can use if you are 
unsure about anything), so personally I have never found this an issue.

>  2) It greatly lessens the possibility of name collisions

Sure, agreed.

>> The disadvantages are obvious - having to type bid:: before every type
>> (annoying if almost every line contains several types from that 
>> namespace)
>
>  Do you also use single-character and two-character names for all your
> variables, functions and types so that you have less to type?

Not 1 or 2 characters, but I try to keep them relatively short (eg 
frWheelLoc rather than frontRightWheelLocation), otherwise lines end up 
being 80+ characters long rather than ~40, which makes a lot of difference 
to readability IMO.

>  Brevity only leads to obfuscation, ie. it causes the code to be harder
> to understand. Using unambiguous names and prefixes makes the code easier
> to read and understand.

I agree up to a point, but IME you can go too far the other way where almost 
every statement is going over several lines, you end up having to split 
would-be single statements into multiple ones, and thus functions take up 
much more lines.  Whilst it may read very nicely if you have the time, 
personally I find it slower to visually find stuff when all the variable and 
function names are too long.

>> and your code looks very "unoptimised" when the same string is repeated a
>> huge number of times.
>
>  Unoptimised? I don't understand what you mean. Unoptimized in what way?

As in it looks like you could be writing it more efficiently.  Same way as 
when you see:

myList.Add( 5 );
myList.Add( 6 );
myList.Add( 7 );
myList.Add( 8 );

You think there must be a better way to do it (using a loop).  If I see:

mfxg::CreateTexture( mfxg::Pixel( mfxg::Color(1,1,0.5) ) , 
mfxg::Style::None );

I think there must be a more efficient way to code that.

Post a reply to this message