CamelCase versus wide_names (Prothon)

[Wilk]

"Mark Hahn" <mark at prothon.org> writes:

> We have agreed in Prothon that unlike Python we are going to be 100%
> consistant in our var and method naming.  We will not have run-together
> words like iteritems, we are going to always have seperated words like
> has_key.
>
> Now we are in the midst of a discussion of camelCase versus wide_names.  So
> far our arguments are:
>
> 1) CamelCase is more elegant, modern, more readable, and more efficient in
> character usage.
>
> 2) Wide_names is cleaner, more readable, compatible with C, which is the
> standard module language for Python and Prothon.  Wide_names is also the
> Python standard.

Before, i used CamelCase, but now i use only wide_name because i find
that capitals letters are a pain for the finger and the wrist.  For
example when you whant to write Q (on querty or azerty keyboard), with
one hand you must make a gymnastic, or you will need two hands.

The best is to try the two very quickly... I've replaced thousand of
lines after it ! But maybe it depends how we use the keyboard...

>
> Of course in the Python world you alread have wide_names as your standard,

Not everytime and i regret...

-- 
Wilk - http://flibuste.net