Renaming instance variable VS use of "this."

Question

Open Topic:
Do you prefer this code?
private var _myVar:int;
public function myClassConstructor(value:int) {
     _myVar = value;
or this code? (JAVA style)
private var myVar:int;
public function myClassConstructor(myVar:int) {
     this.myVar = myVar;
Discuss the pros and cons, especially if performance is involved.
You have 10 minutes... I will be collecting the papers

Answer 1

Bertrand G. wrote:
So no one is concerned about any performance issues using 'this'... I have seen somewhere that using 'this' in C++ is not as efficient as renaming the variable, because it makes an object instantiation or something like that.
Most people will go for clarity of purpose in the code in preference to performance, simply because performance is not a critical factor for MOST purposes.
I personally prefer using this for the setters and getters, this way I can have the same variable name for both the method parameters and the class variable.
Just my 2 cents...
I think the usual practice for getters and setters is to have a private variable for the instance variable and to name it with an underscore prefix to indicate that the variable is private. In that way references to the private variable are distinct to the variable name used in the setter and getter. In any event, in my setter I invariably name the parameter with the new value "newValue" or "newWhatever", some people just use "pWhatever" to indicate that variables have been passed as parameters, so the use of "this" is not required.
I don't see the use of "this" as particularly relevant to performance, or getters and setters, and I would recommend naming private variables with an underscore prefix to indicate the use of a private instance variable, though not everyone follows this convention and may use other conventions, or indeed no convention at all.
Paul