Actually, m_ for members and g_ for globals helps quite a bit while reading a lot of unknown code.

The problem is that this kind of convention is brittle. It encodes information about scope into the variable name, but if you refactor to change scope the encoding is wrong and the variable must be renamed. Forget or neglect to rename the variable and now you've got misleading information.

A far more robust convention is to require the use of this-> for members and to require full namespace naming for globals. The compiler can then help you by catching incorrect usage.

The real question is, do you prefix your structs with the letter 'S'?

So far I also don't prefix struct with S cause I treat struct as an obvious collection of PODs ... something like EmployeeCard containing information about an Employee, instead of containing both information and behavior of what an Employee can do, which I prefer it as an Employee class.

So by that term alone, I have different naming for on struct or class, so I don't really need S or C prefixes on them.

I've started suffixing (as opposed to prefixing) my classes with the word Class. And I use Pascal Case because I started my formal training in Pascal and I like it that way and there's no one that can tell me not to. ;-)

But I'm writing tutorials with beginners in mind. So, I figure, the more explicit the better. What's an object. What's a class. What is this. I figure putting the word Class at the end takes 5 characters and a smidgen of time. VS pretty much autocompletes everything anyway. But there's no question about what it is when the word "class" is slapping you in the face. It also allows me to give my objects the same name, just remove the word "class" from the end. I'm also giving classes their own cpp files and headers and the file names are the class name with the word class at the end.

It also makes it clear that my Texture2DClass.h and .cpp files are dedicated strictly to the Texture2DClass class and you'll know where to go looking for the code of that class without question.

It's maybe a bit overkill, but I'm feeling pretty good about this convention so far.

I also follow this convention elsewhere, by suffixing pointers with the word Pointer and such. I don't bother with standard types like ints and strings. I generally define those pretty locally anyway, and you probably only have to go up one page of code to look up their definition because I try to define all variables at the start of the function/method.

I've started suffixing (as opposed to prefixing) my classes with the word Class.