From: Eivind Eklund <eeklund@...>
Date: 2004-10-22T19:56:57+09:00
Subject: Re: CamelCase issues

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 10:56:34 +0900, trans.  (T. Onoma)
<transami@runbox.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 21 October 2004 08:28 pm, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
> Understood. Consistency in whatever form is nice. I have a made a few
> different suggestions in the past related to this. On one occasion someone
> (and I can't recall who it was unfortunately) made a fair argument against
> dependency on capitalization, as it also hampers progression into
> internationalization. Perhaps that's too forward looking

I think the idea of programming in one's "native language" is a bad
meme.  No matter what you program, the language is a set of specific
codes that you need to memorize.  I learned programming "in english"
(ie, with english keywords) before I knew any english at all, from a
norwegian book.  The difficulty wasn't the keywords - it was the
concepts, and learning to wrap my brain around programming.

I've seen various attempts to internationalizing the internals of
computer programs - these have always ended up worse than keeping
things in english *even for speakers of the language it is
internationalized for*.

The only case where I can think this could work is if ALL code in the
programming language is written in a non-english language, along with
the culture for that programming language.

And in that case, the language won't be Ruby.

Eivind.
-- 
Hazzle free packages for Ruby?
RPA is available from http://www.rubyarchive.org/