From: Horea Raducan <hraducan@...>
Date: 2009-02-17T02:48:46+09:00
Subject: Re: What are your favorite Ruby features?

--000e0cd47c6e67867b04630ccc47
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In my opinion a well managed project will use whatever style convention is
predominant in the language of choice. So I am stuck with the ugly
convention. Maybe it is just me, looks like no other people complain. But i=
t
is like a thorn in my eye and I think it reduces the expressiveness of the
language, it almost forces us to use short/non-expressive names for methods
and variables.

On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 12:01 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
<zznmeb@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Jes=FAs Gabriel y Gal=E1n
> <jgabrielygalan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think this is a matter of opinion and getting used to things,
> > there's no right or wrong here.
> > I am quite happy with that notation. For my eyes it's easier to parse
> > the words because they are physically separated. For me it's
> > beautiful_like_heaven_notation, as opposed to uglyLikeHellNotation :-)
> >
> > Jesus.
>
> +1 ... I much prefer the Ruby / Rails convention. But you really need
> to use whatever convention / programming style is in use on the
> *project*. If it's a project that uses words_separated_by_underscores,
> do that. If the first letter of a variableName is lower case, do that.
> If
> underscore.is.not.a.letter.like.earlier.versions.of.R.but.dot.is.a.letter
> then do that, etc.
>
> :)
> --
> M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
>
> I've never met a happy clam. In fact, most of them were pretty steamed.
>
>

--000e0cd47c6e67867b04630ccc47--