You know what I hate?

[Mike Pokraka]

Hmmm, I used to agree with you. The SAP help also suggests using ordinary
English words.

However over the years of bouncing around different customer sites
(sometimes in rapid succession, sometimes even just for a single day) I
appreciated people using prefixes for much the same reasons Paul
described. Bughunting/understanding foreign workflows is much easier if
it's straightforward to spot which attributes are custom. So these days
I'm back in the other side and prefix them with a small z. (I find caps
more annoying - as in ZAmount).

What is annoying is people that create subtypes and call them ZBUS2096.
Huh? It's a Debit Memo Request. And your subtype should also be called the
same - perhaps with an 'Enhanced' suffix or similar. So I suaually create
subtypes and add a small z before the original object name - as in
zCustDebitMemoReq.

Just my 2p.
Cheers,
Mike


On Mon, December 18, 2006 21:59, Alon Raskin wrote:
> I know that this is mostly an academic argument but I would love to hear
> peoples thoughts on this...
>
> You know what I hate? I hate it when I look at a Z Business Object
> (delegated sub-type) and someone has created a method called zUpdate or an
> attribute called zAmount. Is there really a need for the 'z' in the name
> of the attribute/method? Perhaps there is something I am missing here so
> please feel free to point out the error of my ways.
>
> Do people do this because they don't realise that they can redefine an SAP
> delivered attribute/method? Or are they concerned that SAP will deliver an
> attribute with the exact same name? I assume that the redefined
> method/attribute would not be effected but perhaps someone has had this
> happen...
>
> I understand why people do it with append fields on a table but why do
> this for a BOR sub-type?
>
> Regards,
>
> Alon
> _______________________________________________
> SAP-WUG mailing list
> SAP-WUG at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug
>