It is more typing, because it breaks intellisense (in SSMS 2008, for example). I don't often type table names in Visual Studio, but again, it breaks intellisense there too. At least it is consistent.
I'm not sure why you mention duck typing, as we're speaking specifically about database tables being prefixed "tbl". Language indifferent. You do not, and should not, prefix them with "tbl". Not sure what you mean by "your "more typing"". I have never equated more typing with good / bad practice. Redundant table qualifiers are bad. Don't try and put words into my mouth. On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Processor Devil <[email protected]>wrote: > Here is a nice link about programmer's practices: http://xkcd.com/292/ > > Now seriously: > 1) More typing? Everything anyone does in visual studio is to type few > letters and then smash enter or few arrows down and enter. > 2) I doubt you spend status meetings reading your code aloud (and tbl would > be read as table) > 3) Try to code in Boo or IronPython where you use duck-typing by default. > As I have said I used to tibble (mainly because of Python was my former > programming language of choice). > There was also time I used recursive goto in one of my C programs just > because I wanted to run the code in loop. > Goto is publicly considered as a bad practice, but according to your "more > typing" I guess it's right because I saved me from typing more lines of code > :). > > 2010/11/26 Jamie Fraser <[email protected]> > >> Its bad practice and should be avoided, which is why I said it. Its >> completely redundant, offers no benefit whatsoever, and makes lots of things >> more difficult. Intellisense gets broken, every table requires extra typing, >> talking about tables with other devs/BA/testers requires mental rephrasing. >> >> There are lots of things which won't crash your computer, but it certainly >> doesn't mean you should be doing them. I hope you don't use "doesn't crash >> my machine" as justification for poor programming practices. There is enough >> terrible source code and system architecture out there without adding to it. >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Processor Devil < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Yes, Customers and tblCustomers is really the same thing. So where is the >>> problem in using it? :). >>> There is a choice you can make. My original post wasn't about >>> right/wrong, I just don't like if someone says "NEVER DO >>> THIS!!!!1111eleven". It won't crash your computer and the Earth won't >>> explode. >>> >>> 2010/11/26 Stephen Russell <[email protected]> >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Processor Devil >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > Why not? Now I don't want to hear anything about best practices, I >>>> also had >>>> > times when using variables like tblSomething, strSomething, >>>> fltSomething and >>>> > it still worked. Is there any other problem in that than simply >>>> screwing >>>> > some programmer's ethics? >>>> ------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Data objects don't need to present object types in name. Sorry but >>>> Customers or tblCustomers is the same thing. Why OVERWHELM >>>> intellisense by stuffing every friging TABLE together? Sorry but it >>>> is just sad design from my POV. YMMV. ;-> >>>> >>>> In a GUI having all txtBoxes together is good for ease of finding the >>>> one you are looking for and you don't have too many to deal with, I >>>> hope. >>>> >>>> Now putting the data type for each column really can tweak me as very >>>> poor design. >>>> >>>> vcCustomerName, dtInvoiceDate, intInvoiceNumber. Why waste the >>>> letters? Is there any benefit that you receive? >>>> >>>> I am a firm believer of KISS naming when we live in a strict type data >>>> environment. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Stephen Russell >>>> >>>> Sr. Production Systems Programmer >>>> CIMSgts >>>> >>>> 901.246-0159 cell >>>> >>> >>> >> >
