@vars look weird when one documents numeric fields. I know, why limit it to numeric fields? When documenting alpha fields the @vars are not always apparent at first glance.
The original developers of our suite used the "AM, FM, VM, SM" convention. Ugh! "War is God's way of teaching Americans geography." - Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914). -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glen B Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 2:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [U2] Attribute marks in comments? Here's my typical marking convention. You can always make up your own, though. Why not use the @vars? ] = field mark / = value mark ^ = sub-value mark Glen http://picksource.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Barry Brevik > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 1:45 PM > To: U2-users (E-mail) > Subject: [U2] Attribute marks in comments? > > > Is there a standard or convention for representing attribute marks in > program comments? > > In other words, if I want to document the structure of a dynamic > array in a > comment, are there single characters that I would use instead of @FM, @VM > etc? > ------- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ____________________________________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and also may be privileged. If you are not the named recipient, or have otherwise received this communication in error, please delete it from your inbox, notify the sender immediately, and do not disclose its contents to any other person, use them for any purpose, or store or copy them in any medium. Thank you for your cooperation. ____________________________________________________________ ------- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
