Programming Practice: Multiple symbols with the same name

[anonymous23323124]

I have two nested classes named Level and OStream. The OStream class has a member of type Level:

class Log {
 
   class Level { ... };
   class OStream { ... public: Log::Level Level; ... };

};

As you can see due to a lack of imagination, both the variable and the class have the same name. Obviously this works, but would it be considered to be bad programming practice? Opinions, people?

[sohguanh]

In general, C++ developers like to prefix m_XXX or mXXX to indicate data members in a C++ class. I think this is good convention as sometimes the whole source code for a C++ class can span multiple pages and we get lost pretty quickly. A naming convention for data members make it easy from a maintenance point of view.

[moorecm]

In C++, Level and level are different identifiers--they are not named the same. It's commonplace to see variables named like that. Some also adopt internal coding standards that specify naming conventions (such as mLevel for a member, etc...).

[anonymous23323124]

Thanks for the advice.

I know that they are different identifiers, but I thought it might be asking for trouble to give them the same name, since you have to remember to use "Log::Level" when the variable "Level" is in scope.

[moorecm]

Forgive me, I thought it was "Log::Level" and "level". I would say that is a bad idea.

[anonymous23323124]

Ah, OK. Very well, I shall put an m in front of the member variable then. Thanks again both of you.