>>>>I myself call it rubbish to name a class the same as the vcx.
>>>
>>>Full ACK
>>
>>Unless you have a single class in the vcx - then it serves no purpose to have separate names. I've worked in a place where the forms were kept in classlibs, one per vcx - in that layout, vcx==class. Of course, framework stuff was n classes 1 vcx, and then none of the classes was named the same as the vcx.
>
>You might call (and use) it as you like. It's just a matter of taste. I was giving my POV analyzing the initial message only.
>I prefer a kind of hungarian notation. So my lib would be something like "people.vcx" and the classes would be like "frmNames", "de_Names" and so on.

So do I, in my own stuff. I see a case for the 1:1 vcx, though. It made sense to an extent - it had, though its downside in the flat model project manager. If there was a way to regroup stuff there by topic instead of filetypes, this would have worked much better.