The name of the variable should describe what it is. Good variable naming makes Hungarian notation useless.
However, sometimes you'd use Hungarian notation in addition to good variable naming. m_numObjects has two "prefixes:" m_ and num. m_ indicates the scope: it's a data member tied to this. num indicates what the value is.
Nu mă simt împiedicat deloc atunci când citesc codul "bun", chiar dacă conține unele "maghiari". Corect: Am citit codul, nu îl dau pe el. (De fapt, nu folosesc niciodată mouse-ul meu atunci când codul, sau orice voodoo programare-caracteristici specifice de căutare.)
I am slowed when I read things like m_ubScale (yes, I'm looking at you, Liran!), as I have to look at its usage (no comments!) to find out what it scales (if at all?) and it's datatype (which happens to be a fixed-point char). A better name would be m_scaleFactor or m_zoomFactor, with a comment as a fixed-point number, or even a typedef. (In fact, a typedef would be useful, as there are several other members of several classes which use the same fixed-point format. However, some don't, but are still labeled m_ubWhatever! Confusing, to say the least.)
Cred că limba maghiară era menită a fi un aditiv la numele variabilei, nu un înlocuitor pentru informații. De asemenea, de multe ori, notația maghiară nu adaugă deloc la citire variabilă, pierzând octeți și timp de citire.
Doar meu 2 ¢.