From: ptkwt@...1.aracnet.com (Phil Tomson)
Date: 2002-03-16T04:16:33+09:00
Subject: Re: camelCase and underscore_style

In article <99DD35F8BFC4D511A3C500508BEE03A23246DC@mail01>,
Morris, Chris <chris.morris@snelling.com> wrote:
>First, a question. If underscore_style is the Ruby norm for methods and the
>like, what's the Ruby norm for class names? The few I perused were single
>word classes (like String, Array), but all my classes seem to be two or
>three words, so I CamelCaseThem. Is that Ruby typical?
>
>Ron:
>> And why can't Ruby people use camel case? it is ten times 
>> easier to type
>> x-shift-P than to type x_p. Or at least 50% easier :) But I digress...
>
>Pete:
>> (umm ... lost the msg, but he said, to him,
>underscore_style_was_easier_to_read)
>
>I agree with Ron on the typing point, and after giving the underscore style
>a try, I think it is easier to read one thing with the underscore style, but
>I find a whole block of code with lots of underscored names in it
>distracting, because my eye is drawn to the underscores. Or is a code block
>with lots of underscored names a code smell? :)
>
>I noticed code samples in the pickaxe book used camelCase. Dave/Andy, was
>this an issue at all in writing the book?
>
>Chris
>

Personally, I tend to use camelCase for variable and class names and 
underscore_style for method names but I don't think there is any consensus 
on this and it probably just indicates that I'm very confused ;-)

Phil