Case-sensitivity: why -- or why not? (was Re: Damnation!)

[Will Rose]

Andrew Henshaw <andrew.henshaw at gtri.gatech.edu> wrote:
: Ben Cornett  wrote:
:>
:>this IS An exAmple oF WHat I meaNt WHEn I SAid "vOtIng DoesN'T HElP".
:>
: ...snip...
: The interesting thing about this is that I could read it.  A case-insensitive
: compiler couldn't handle a single case flip.  That's why I don't understand
: the argument that (English-speaking) humans are case sensitive.  In general
: we're not.  We prefer that everyone follow case-usage rules, but we don't
: require it.  In my opinion, that's the way programming should work.  I would
: like to read a program that followed case usage for readability; but, I
: don't want an interpreter to barf when case is ignored.  

: If I name a function 'Function', then I'm doing it for readability; but, when
: I'm in the interpreter, I want to type 'function'.  Particularly because of
: its interactive environment, I find the argument for a case-preserving,
: case-insensitive Python very compelling.

A lot of people feel as you do; but I, personally, see 'function' and
'Function' as two different tokens, and would be very irritated if a
compiler treated them as identical.  I'm afraid that's just the way
I (and others) read code; I don't understand why we got that way, any
more than I understand the attitude that all capitalization is equivalent.
It seems to be some basic difference in reading or comprehension.

OTOH, I'd find a monocase language, either upper or lower case, more
readable than the case-preserving / case-insenstive combination, if
Python has to be simplified for students.

Will
cwr at cts.com