[coding-style] Naming Conventions: What to name a boolean variable?

I need a good variable name for a boolean value that returns false when an object is the last in a list.

The only decent name I can come up with is 'inFront', but I don't think that is descriptive enough.

Another choose would be 'isNotLast'. This is not good practice though (Code Complete, page 269, Use positive boolean variable names).

I am aware that I could change the variable definition. So true is returned when an object is the last and call the variable 'isLast', however, it would make this task easier if I had the first explanation.

hasFollowingItems? or hasFollowingXXXXs where XXXX is whatever the item in your list is?

How about:

 hasSiblings
 or isFollowedBySiblings (or isFolloedByItems, or isFollowedByOtherItems etc.)
 or moreItems

Although I think that even though you shouldn't make a habit of braking 'the rules' sometimes the best way to accomplish something may be to make an exception of the rule (Code Complete guidelines), and in your case, name the variable isNotLast

My vote would be to name it IsLast and change the functionality. If that isn't really an option, I'd leave the name as IsNotLast.

I agree with Code Complete (Use positive boolean variable names), I also believe that rules are made to be broken. The key is to break them only when you absoluately have to. In this case, none of the alternative names are as clear as the name that "breaks" the rule. So this is one of those times where breaking the rule can be okay.

isPenultimateOrPrior

isBeforeEnd

Haskell uses init to refer to all but the last element of a list (the inverse of tail, basically); would isInInit work, or is that too opaque?

A simple semantic name would be last. This would allow code always positive code like:

if (item.last)
    ...

do {
   ...
} until (item.last);

Two issues to think about

1. What is the scope of the variable (in other words: are you speaking about a local variable or a field?) ? A local variable has a narrower scope compared to a field. In particular, if the variable is used inside a relatively short method I would not care so much about its name. When the scope is large naming is more important.

2. I think there's an inherent conflict in the way you treat this variable. On the one hand you say "false when an object is the last in a list", where on the other hand you also want to call it "inFront". An object that is (not) last in the list does not strike me as (not) inFront. This I would go with isLast.

Personally more than anything I would change the logic, or look at the business rules to see if they dictate any potential naming.

Since, the actual condition that toggles the boolean is actually the act of being "last". I would say that switching the logic, and naming it "IsLastItem" or similar would be a more preferred method.