From: Anders Borch Date: 2004-03-24T21:19:28+09:00 Subject: Re: proposal - enforce lower_case for variables and methods Tim Sutherland wrote: > In article , Simon Strandgaard > wrote: > >>Ruby does already enforce CamelCase for class/modules. >> >>'camelCase' for variables/methods is easy to confuse with >>ClassNames. Its hard to distinguish for newcomers if they >>should use 'under_score' syntax or 'camelCase' syntax. If >>the person has a Java background it may be natual though >>(but being friendly to Java persons may hurt Ruby). >> >>However I don't use 'camelCase' and I tend to _avoid_ >>libraries which uses forces me to it. Luckily many of them >>provide underscore aliases. >> >>In Ruby2 it would be nice to get rid of 'camelCase', so >>that 'under_score' naming is enforced by the language. >> >>Should I submit an RCR about this ? >>Resistance ? any good reasons to use camelCase ? > > > There are libraries which provide a bridge between Ruby and e.g. Java, .NET > and Python. For example, you can have Ruby call a Java method. If the Java > method is called `someJavaMethod' then you will want your Ruby code to say > `foo.someJavaMethod(123)`. there's also a .NET bridge, the .net libraries capitalize their method names... should we allow foo.SomeDotNetMethod(123)? this is not an argument either way, just a question. -- dc -e 4dd*od3*dddn1-89danrn10-dan3+ann6*dan*2*an13dn1+dn2-dn3+5*ddan2/9+an13nap