I wouldn't say that I *prefer* the current solution, but the current
solution is not so bad that I need it changed.
It works fine, despite being confusing. If it wasn't consistent with
the rest of the attributes, I'd say it was in need of changes, but it
fits within the scheme already outlined.
I think we have more important problems to worry about than this.
-Steve
I'm not sure either but I usually use the suffix version.
The question is if there is any case where the prefix one could be harmful
(i.e. not resulting in an error message).
Maybe the following?:
class Foo
{
private static Bar[] bar;
// author thinks it returns a const pointer etc.
const Foo* ptr()
{
return bar.ptr;
}
}
