mixed solution: unicase (unique allowed case) (was: Re:

[Tim Rowe]

In article <hbX_4.6274$Hz.46116 at news-server.bigpond.net.au>, 
neilh at scintilla.org (Neil Hodgson) wrote:

>    Its often hard to argue against freedom because we have a natural
> tendency to desire liberty. I see the big benefit in having programming
> language restrictions is that they facilitate reasoning about what code 
> does
> by eliminating the need to consider additional realms of variability.
> 
>    "OK, so sacrifice your freedom but leave mine alone!"
> 
>    By making the restrictions optional, the code is made harder to
> understand because of the additional factor that then goes into
> understanding it. Because of the optional strict mode of Visual Basic, 
> you
> have to remember when reading code whether it is in a strictly typed 
> module
> or not.

Ok. You say you've just switched to the "a_" convention. Come back when 
you've been using it for a year or so, and tell me whether you've actually 
find it useful or not. At the moment we have practical experience pitted 
against a theoretical problem. If the theoretical problem turns out to be 
real, then there's a problem to resolve; if not, why fix what's not 
broken?