------art_15779_13592843.1137803529796
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

I tend to prefer to adopt the stylistic conventions of the language I am
working in. Rather than try to hold on to some cross-language personal
preference, I find having my code match the style of the libraries that I am
using to be the most aesthetically pleasing.

Gabe

On 1/20/06, Zach <zacharooni / comcast.net> wrote:
>
>     I know the current naming standards of the language. My curiosity is
> how many programmers prefer it.
>
> Prime example given by a few: snake_case is preferable to Japanese
> Readers.
>
> -Zach
>
> Eero Saynatkari wrote:
>
> >Zach wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Alrighty,
> >>
> >>    I've another question I'd like to pose the Ruby community. Coming
> >>from a Java background, so I'm rather used to "camelCase" as opposed to
> >>what looks to be the standard "ruby_case". (For those who don't know, If
> >>a method is java was named "DoSomething"  it would be called
> >>"doSomething" in Java, and likewise "do_something" in Ruby.)
> >>
> >>Arguments I've personally witnessed against Camel Case is Acronyms. If I
> >>have an "ABC" in Camel Case it I'd have to would be to break up the
> >>acronym like "aBC" if it appears at the beginning of the word. A lot of
> >>people try to push the word to the end, others say to have the whole
> >>acronym as lowercase "abc", but I think that is just a workaround for
> >>the problem not a solution.
> >>
> >>Once I started programming in ruby, I was a little surprised at the use
> >>of the underscore, but I'm wondering the sentiments of the programmers
> >>out there. Do you prefer word breaks by underscore or case? Does is look
> >>more readable? Does anything else irk you with Camel Case and/or Ruby's
> >>preference?
> >>
> >>Not trying to incite flame_wars or the like, looking for honest
> >>opinions.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The big thing is that Ruby attaches semantic meaning to the naming
> >scheme: all constants must start with an uppercase letter, so your
> >classes and modules have CamelCaseNames. Because of this, seeing
> >something like obj.MethodName or even obj.methodName causes a ruby
> >programmer an involuntary double-take to ensure it indeed refers to
> >a method, not a constant. For this reason (and others that have been
> >battled over pretty much since the keyboard was invented), it is
> >preferred that the following is used:
> >
> >  * Classes and modules use CamelCase
> >  * Constants use ALL_CAPS
> >  * Methods and variables use underscored_names
> >
> >
> >
> >>-Zach
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >E
> >
> >
> >
>
>

------art_15779_13592843.1137803529796--