Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] Style and organization of code
-
David Allsopp
-
Richard Jones
- Quôc_Peyrot
-
Richard Jones
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2007-03-16 (03:51) |
From: | Quôc_Peyrot <chojin@l...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Style and organization of code |
On Mar 15, 2007, at 4:48 PM, Richard Jones wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 11:08:28PM -0000, David Allsopp wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 05:25:37PM -0500, ian wrote: >>>> Say I have a function called "solveHardProblem". >>> >>> Ack! studlyCaps is horrible and unreadable (I know - I'm currently >>> involved in a project which uses them). Try "solve_hard_problem" >>> instead. >> Horrible and unreadable? We seem to be forgetting that camel >> notation versus >> underscores is entirely a matter of taste... I have no problem >> reading camel >> notation and find underscores ugly (not to mention harder to type >> than >> caps). I've always found the argument "the standard library uses this >> notation" to be a very weak argument typically coming from more >> senior >> programmers who're clutching at straws to justify their opinions ;o) >> >> I'm glad that, most of the time, the only standard library >> functions I use >> with underscores are {type}_of_{other type} or {to|from|of}_{type} >> so don't >> happen too often. >> >> (amusing aside: I once worked for a company that mixed the two... >> giving >> solve_Hard_Problem which was particularly tedious!!) > > noIReallyThingYouReWrongAboutThisOne. To quote gaim/HACKING: "Coding styles are like assholes, everyone has one and no one likes anyone elses." - Eric Warmenhoven -- Best Regards, Quôc