I have a naming strategy for denoting the nature of code entity (variable, method, etc.) which accounts for the most common permutations of scope, entity type, and mutability, but I have not been able to choose a way of denoting private static member fields (not properties).

What are some recommended ways of denoting this?

> 
> **Update:** For what it's worth, I do understand that this has fallen out of
>  fashion, and that for C# particularly,
>  Microsoft argues against it. I should
>  specify that my goal in this is not to
>  provide a level of "documentation",
>  but simply to be able to get as much information as possible with as little motion and cross referencing as possible.
> 
> 
> Personally I feel it would be ideal if
>  identifiers could be restricted to
>  conveying information about purpose,
>  and leave code context information to
>  the IDE to convey. However, since
>  VS2008 does not appear to provide
>  highlighting/styling options which are
>  based on scope or mutability, and I
>  don't feel that tooltips are
>  particularly efficient in this because
>  of the required mouse motion and
>  waiting, I find myself limited in my
>  options.
> 
> 
> 

For reference, I primarily program in C#, and below is a sampling of my current naming conventions:

* Method argument or local variable: thisIsMyVariable
* Instance-level private field: \_thisIsMyVariable
* Public instance- or class-level property or method: ThisIsMyVariable
* Constant: THIS\_IS\_MY\_VARIABLE

For private static fields I've been considering these:

* s\_thisIsMyVariable
* \_ThisIsMyVariable