Find centralized, trusted content and collaborate around the technologies you use most.
Learn more about CollectivesStack Internal
Knowledge at work
Bring the best of human thought and AI automation together at your work.
Explore Stack InternalAs for the other part of the question, it's common to put the underscore at the end of the variable name to not clash with anything internal.
I do this even inside classes and namespaces because I then only have to remember one rule (compared to "at the end of the name in global scope, and the beginning of the name everywhere elseelse").
As for the other part of the question, it's common to put the underscore at the end of the variable name to not clash with anything internal.
I do this even inside classes and namespaces because I then only have to remember one rule (compared to "at the end of the name in global scope, and the beginning of the name everywhere else).
As for the other part of the question, it's common to put the underscore at the end of the variable name to not clash with anything internal.
I do this even inside classes and namespaces because I then only have to remember one rule (compared to "at the end of the name in global scope, and the beginning of the name everywhere else").
As for the other part of the question, it's common to put the underscore at the end of the variable name to not clash with anything internal.
I do this even inside classes and namespaces because I then only have to remember one rule (compared to "at the end of the name in global scope, andt heand the beginning of the name everywhere else).
As for the other part of the question, it's common to put the underscore at the end of the variable name to not clash with anything internal.
I do this even inside classes and namespaces because I then only have to remember one rule (compared to "at the end of the name in global scope, andt he beginning of the name everywhere else).
As for the other part of the question, it's common to put the underscore at the end of the variable name to not clash with anything internal.
I do this even inside classes and namespaces because I then only have to remember one rule (compared to "at the end of the name in global scope, and the beginning of the name everywhere else).
As for the other part of the question, it's common to put the underscore at the end of the variable name to not clash with anything internal.
I do this even inside classes and namespaces because name mangling is implementation-defined and it is possible that class_name::_variable_name would be mangled into something starting with a _I then only have to remember one rule (because _variable_name starts with a _compared to "at the end of the name in global scope, andt he beginning of the name everywhere else). class_name::variable_name_ however won't ever get mangled that way.
As for the other part of the question, it's common to put the underscore at the end of the variable name to not clash with anything internal.
I do this even inside classes and namespaces because name mangling is implementation-defined and it is possible that class_name::_variable_name would be mangled into something starting with a _ (because _variable_name starts with a _). class_name::variable_name_ however won't ever get mangled that way.
As for the other part of the question, it's common to put the underscore at the end of the variable name to not clash with anything internal.
I do this even inside classes and namespaces because I then only have to remember one rule (compared to "at the end of the name in global scope, andt he beginning of the name everywhere else).
