Case sensitive and ludicrous statements

[rzed]

Douglas Alan wrote:
> "rzed" <Dick.Zantow at lexisnexis.com> writes:
>

[snip]

>> whether they [underscores] make text easier to read than camelcase
stuff is a
>> matter of opinion and is based on what people are used to.
>
> i_really_don't_think_it_is_a_matter_of_opinion.  i_think_it_is_a
> matter_of_human_cognition, and_i'm_willing_to_bet_that_cognitive
> psychology_experiments_would_prove_me_right, although_i_have_no_such
> experiments_to_cite_at_the_moment.
>
> IHaveBeenUsingCamelCaseEveryDayForAboutTenYearsNow,
> andIStillFindItMuchMoreDifficultToReadThanTheAlternatives.
> ItNoLongerMakesMeWantToHurlTheWayThatItUsedTo,ButEasyToReadItIsNot.
>
> just compare the preceding two paragraphs for readability.  that
> should be all the proof one needs.

I can see we won't agree about this. I find it much more distracting
to have interspersed underscores. So, while I agree that's all the
proof we need, I can't agree with you on what is proved.

>
>> i went from one form to the other and had no trouble adjusting; it
>> took very little time for me to come to prefer camelcase.
>
> a chaque son gout, but if you are using camelCase in a
> case-insensitive language, i believe that you are still making a
> serious mistake.

I couldn't agree more, there!  But I was talking about switching to a
case-sensitive language.

In case-insensitive coding, I do believe it *could* be useful to adopt
case conventions for some purposes, but it's far too easy for
programmers with conflicting views on case to much with each other's
code, and the result is a mess.

It'll be interesting to see which way Python 3K goes, don't you think?

--
rzed