From: Paul Vudmaska <paul@...>
Date: 2004-02-26T06:37:09+09:00
Subject: Re: Appropriate use of camelCase

Kirk Haines wrote:

>On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Austin Ziegler wrote:
>
>  
>
>>The trick here, though, is that Ruby has a style: two-space indentation, no 
>>tabs. If you write a library that you want included in the standard library, 
>>you need to conform to the style there.
>>    
>>
>
>And I agree with you here.  If I were writing code that was going to be in 
>the standard library, I'd go through the pain of conforming my style to 
>the described "Ruby" style so that it fits in with the rest of the code.
>
>When writing the code that keeps my family fed, though, it is far too hard
>to make sure my Perl adhere's the the described Perl community's style,
>and my Java to the described Java community's style, and my Ruby to Ruby
>style, and my Bash scripts to yet a different style, and my C to....  
>It's too many completely arbitrary styles.  Far better for me to use the
>style that fits best with the way I work and the way that I read code and
>to do so consistently across everything that I have to produce and to
>maintain.
>
That seems like a real world use of case to me. Some of the
comments here tend to be a bit zealot'ish. I find your approach not only acceptable but preferred. Not that you are, but I would not sweat it too much.


>If anything that I write ever becomes interesting enough to other people 
>that I have people actually using it and looking at the code, then I will 
>find it worthwhile, for those items, to make a pass through them 
>converting the abhorred camelCase to snake_case and tabs to spaces and 
>everything else necessary to fit into the described Ruby style.
>
>Thanks for the discussion.  It's been fun.
>
>
>Kirk Haines
>
>
>  
>