>>>>>But if I was coding in a team I would do whatever the team does, my personal preferences can be a bit unusual.
>>>>
>>>>Don't see anything wrong with your preferences. I'd be the first to agree that there is no single ideal convention - arguing against options simnply because they don't match one's own preferences is a bit silly. But I'd still like to find a reference to the MS 'official' line on this :-}
>>>
>>>I honestly thought I had seen an official MS statement on it, but I looked and looked and couldn't find one, so I think I just imagined it.
>>
>>Same here. I see a few 'third-party' links saying that MS frown on the underscore prefix, none sayiing they approve or even condone - but although I'm sure I've seen an 'official' disapproval I can't find it. And,
>
>>>TBH, using it makes sense to me if it differentiates between fields and local variables.
>
>Exactly!!!
>
>>>Weren't underscores in C++ intended for compiler use?
>
>Double ones:
>
>"The ANSI C standard allows identifiers with two leading underscores to be reserved for compiler implementations. "
>
>
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/befeaky0.aspxThat was it. Actually it says the a single underscore followed by an uppercase letter is also reserved. And the MS version added single underscore + lowercase letter to the list....
