From: Damphyr <damphyr@...>
Date: 2005-10-05T20:14:58+09:00
Subject: Re: Object Orientation

Krekna Mektek wrote:
> Wow, thanx, these, especially the Little Ruby, A Lot of Objects draft
>  book, are nice links.
> 
> 
> By the way, why are methods not named following the
> lowercaseUppercase convention, as in Java? This way I can see more
> directly that something is a method, and not an instance variable.
> 
> I'd like to do it that way, but am not sure if this is against some 
> Ruby philosophy..
> 
As with all things, it's a matter of convention.
In Ruby the convention is to use small case with underscores i.e. 
do_the_cool_method_thing
In the beginning I used lowUpcase (the dreaded momentum upon entry) but 
I  changed very quickly and find the underscore_methods nicer to look 
upon, when not more descriptive.
I remember a thread quite a while back, where someone had written a 
module to lowUpcase methods dynamically.
Somehow I can't see how I would confuse instance ariables with method 
calls, but I guess it's the same thing that makes me not see the use in 
m_str and other sickly prefixes in typed languages: my way of reading code.
Cheers,
V.-
-- 
http://www.braveworld.net/riva

____________________________________________________________________
http://www.freemail.gr - ������ �������� ������������ ������������.
http://www.freemail.gr - free email service for the Greek-speaking.