为什么在C ++类中的成员变量上使用前缀 [英] Why use prefixes on member variables in C++ classes
问题描述
很多C ++代码使用语法约定来标记成员变量。常见示例包括
A lot of C++ code uses syntactical conventions for marking up member variables. Common examples include
- m_ * memberName *用于公共成员（根本使用公用成员）
<对于私人成员或所有成员，
其他人尝试使用 - >
Others try to enforce using this->member whenever a member variable is used.
根据我的经验，大多数较大的代码库不能一致地应用这些规则。
In my experience, most larger code bases fail at applying such rules consistently.
在其他语言中，这些惯例远不如普遍。我看到它只是偶尔在Java或C＃代码。我想我从来没有见过它在Ruby或Python代码。因此，似乎有一种趋势，更多的现代语言不使用成员变量的特殊标记。
In other languages, these conventions are far less widespread. I see it only occasionally in Java or C# code. I think I have never seen it in Ruby or Python code. Thus, there seems to be a trend with more modern languages to not use special markup for member variables.
这个约定今天在C ++中仍然有用，或者它只是一个时代错误。特别是因为它在图书馆之间如此不一致地使用。没有其他语言显示没有成员前缀？
Is this convention still useful today in C++ or is it just an anachronism. Especially as it is used so inconsistently across libraries. Haven't the other languages shown that one can do without member prefixes?
推荐答案
您必须小心使用前导下划线。保留字的大写字母前的下划线。
例如：
You have to be careful with using a leading underscore. A leading underscore before a capital letter in a word is reserved. For example:
_Foo
_L
都是保留字，而
_foo
_l
不是。还有其他情况，不允许使用小写字母前的下划线。在我的具体情况下，我发现_L恰好由Visual C ++ 2005保留，并且冲突创建了一些意想不到的结果。
are not. There are other situations where leading underscores before lowercase letters are not allowed. In my specific case, I found the _L happened to be reserved by Visual C++ 2005 and the clash created some unexpected results.
我在围绕它是多么有用以标记局部变量。
I am on the fence about how useful it is to mark up local variables.
这是一个关于标识符保留的链接：
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/228783/what-are-the-rules-about-using-an -underscore-in-ac-identifier
Here is a link about which identifiers are reserved: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/228783/what-are-the-rules-about-using-an-underscore-in-a-c-identifier
这篇关于为什么在C ++类中的成员变量上使用前缀的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
