4 ms·

For what it's worth. I like to call out views in the naming. I'll typically use a "vw_" prefix prior to a name which would be similar to table naming. "v_" i

For what it's worth. I like to call out views in the naming. I'll typically use a "vw_" prefix prior to a name which would be similar to table naming. "v_" is also an option, but I also write a lot of DB functions and stored procedures and with all the types, tables, and column names that get used, indicating variables and parameters can be helpful... so "v_" indicates a variable name in the function context which is why views get "vw_".

cwbriscoe 2y ago
I do this but at the end: some_table_vw
Kwpolska 2y ago
1980 called, they want their Hungarian Notation back.
- richbell 2y ago
  That's an easy swipe to make. What would you suggest instead?
  - Kwpolska 2y ago
    A prefix/suffix for views is maaybe acceptable. But definitely not within database functions and procedures.
    - richbell 2y ago
      > But definitely not within database functions and procedures. I generally find Hungarian notation silly, however, there's a compelling argument to have them in functions and procedures — perhaps more than for views. The type of the variable matters just as much as where/how it was declared, such as in/out params. That's the 'steelman' argument for them, as I understand it.
- sbuttgereit 2y ago
  Mid-range one-liners don't really make convincing arguments, though do they? I appreciate this comment may have been made more in service of a certain smugness and self-satisfaction rather than any real or concrete complaint... but you do you. On the flip side... perhaps using techniques from the 80s with a programming language and paradigm also from the 80s... and that hasn't changed all that much... isn't all that crazy. At the end of the day: the evaluation of a given technique such as I described, should be measured against if it makes the development experience simpler and more comprehensible. Being able to instantly tell if a given reference in a procedural query comes from a table a view, a variable, or a parameter, I find helpful since we're typically using many names from these different origins and contexts and frequently side-by-side, such as in a complex query driving the procedural code. Of course, If you don't like that, or simply don't find it sufficiently "modern" or "fashionable" (my God, what might others think!?)... again, I invite you to do you.

cwbriscoe 2y ago

I do this but at the end: some_table_vw

Kwpolska 2y ago

1980 called, they want their Hungarian Notation back.

richbell 2y ago
That's an easy swipe to make. What would you suggest instead?
- Kwpolska 2y ago
  A prefix/suffix for views is maaybe acceptable. But definitely not within database functions and procedures.
  - richbell 2y ago
    > But definitely not within database functions and procedures. I generally find Hungarian notation silly, however, there's a compelling argument to have them in functions and procedures — perhaps more than for views. The type of the variable matters just as much as where/how it was declared, such as in/out params. That's the 'steelman' argument for them, as I understand it.
sbuttgereit 2y ago
Mid-range one-liners don't really make convincing arguments, though do they? I appreciate this comment may have been made more in service of a certain smugness and self-satisfaction rather than any real or concrete complaint... but you do you. On the flip side... perhaps using techniques from the 80s with a programming language and paradigm also from the 80s... and that hasn't changed all that much... isn't all that crazy. At the end of the day: the evaluation of a given technique such as I described, should be measured against if it makes the development experience simpler and more comprehensible. Being able to instantly tell if a given reference in a procedural query comes from a table a view, a variable, or a parameter, I find helpful since we're typically using many names from these different origins and contexts and frequently side-by-side, such as in a complex query driving the procedural code. Of course, If you don't like that, or simply don't find it sufficiently "modern" or "fashionable" (my God, what might others think!?)... again, I invite you to do you.