Re: 'this' instance field reference

I have only rarely seen "this" used. With code-aware editors turning
your properties a different color, I'm not sure about the readability
argument, especially if one is practicing Hungarian notation (often
m_propertyName).


--- "A. Kevin Baynes" <[email protected]> wrote:

> The idea of clarifying scope of variables is good. In Ruby, all
> globals start with $, instances with @, local instances with
> lowercase
> and constants with an uppercase.
> 
> I think I can buy into 'this.instanceVariable' on those grounds,
> although this does remind me of Tools vs Language arguments... you
> don't need explicit naming conventions like Ruby's if you have great
> tools like Eclipse (which tells you the scope of a variable on mouse
> hover).
> 
> I think you've convinced me, though.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> On 8/2/06, Larry Karnowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Kevin,
> > I don't understand why people are so afraid of typing five extra
> > letters.  Just do it -- for both methods and instance variables. 
> It
> > immediately removes all doubt as to the scope of the member in
> question,
> > improves readability, and doesn't hurt anything.
> >
> > In other languages, most notably Python, you are required to use it
> to
> > reference instance members at all.  (In Python it is "self." which
> is
> > their equivalent of "this.")
> >
> > Larry "this.unafraid" Karnowski
> >
> > A. Kevin Baynes wrote:
> > > In an unformal code review, I have a colleague who wrote :
> > >
> > > --
> > > 'Access to instance fields should be prefixed with "this."'
> > >
> > > and
> > >
> > > 'Note I'm talking about variables here, not methods. I agree that
> > > "this." is unconventional on method calls, but I think there is
> fairly
> > > universal agreement these days about use of "this." on
> *variables*.'
> > > --
> > >
> > > I know that 'this' is needed to resolve class level varaibles
> obscured
> > > within a method by a local variable of the same name, and is
> needed to
> > > call sibling constructors.
> > >
> > > I don't see any problem in referencing class variables as
> 'this.foo'
> > > if you wish, it reads the same to me.
> > >
> > > My question is 'this' :
> > >
> > > Do any of you support this purported 'univeral agreement' theory?
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Larry Karnowski
> > HickoryWind.org, Keeps Callin' Me Home
> > Americana Music News, Reviews, & Personality
> > www.hickorywind.org
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> A. Kevin Baynes
> 
> Life's a garden. Dig it!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Juglist mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_trijug.org
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com