On Saturday 06 August 2011 10:58:43 am Jan Steinman wrote: > > From: Johnny Withers <joh...@pixelated.net> > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_notation
Well, I can see this being useful in assembly language, or strongly-typed, non-OO languages. But I was asking specifically about SQL! When will this EVER make sense:? select * from intCustomers; We know from context that customers is a table and it makes no sense at all to prefix a type to it in order to make the obvious more clear. I guess we could have: select * from viewCustomers; or select * from tblCustomers: But really? My personal convention is that table names are plural. Foreign indexes have the table name as a prefix. For example. create table customers ( id integer, index. companies_id integer, name varchar(20) ); Obviously, companies_id is a reference to the id field in a table called companies. Just my $.02, but any comments are welcome. > "The original Hungarian notation... was invented by Charles Simonyi... who > later became Chief Architect at Microsoft." > > Ugh. That explains a lot! > > The only time I let types intrude on names is with booleans, which I try to > name with a state-of-being verb, such as "has_paid", "is_member", > "has_children", etc. > > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Mike Diehl <mdi...@diehlnet.com> wrote: > >> Well, while we're on the subject of SQL style, can anyone tell me why > >> I'm always seeing people prefixing the name of a table with something > >> like "tbl?" > > ---------------- > You can't do anything about the length of your life, but you can do > something about its width and depth. -- H. L. Mencken > > :::: Jan Steinman, EcoReality Co-op :::: -- Take care and have fun, Mike Diehl. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org