[microtherion]

So, naive code attracts naive programmers? I'm not sure this is the ringing endorsement you take it to be.

I should also add that Hungarian notation is the prototypical example of dumb, verbose code, that wants to make individual lines easier to understand by dragging type information into every single variable name.

[Riverheart]

Or you know, people who respect their time.

[Sebb767]

> I should also add that Hungarian notation is the prototypical example of dumb, verbose code

If used wrongly. Joel Spolsky wrote a whole post on it[0], but the TL;DR is that you should use the notation to differentiate between variables of the same type. For example, you might have world coordinates and object coordinates in a game script. Correctly used Hungarian notation would denote them, for example, with `wPosX` and `pPosX`. Even though they're both int (or float), you can easily see that you shouldn't assign one to the other.

Using them to notate types, however, as in `iPosX`, is completely useless. I fully agree with that.

[0] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2005/05/11/making-wrong-code-...

[vlovich123]

For dynamic languages sure. For strongly typed languages it's better to just use the type system to prevent those kind of things. C++ doesn't have great support here (lots of boilerplate needed) & usually people reach for Boost Units or Boost strong types but it's not that hard (https://www.fluentcpp.com/2016/12/08/strong-types-for-strong...). Mozilla is also exploring this specifically for coordinate spaces & whatnot too (https://research.mozilla.org/2014/06/23/static-checking-of-u...).

[jfkebwjsbx]

There is no need for Hungarian notation because types are way too complex in C++ for that. On top of that, an IDE tells you right away the type if you want.