CamelCase versus wide_names (Prothon)

[Peter Hansen]

Mark Hahn wrote:

> 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.
> 
> Of course in the Python world you alread have wide_names as your standard,
> but could you for the moment pretend you were picking your standard from
> scratch (as we are doing in the Prothon world) and give your vote for which
> you'd prefer?

camelCase, provided acronyms (if any) are treated as words and
capitalized appropriate.  For example, updateGui() is preferred
to updateGUI() (or update_GUI or update_gui).  IBM did it right
with the OS/2 API (at some point, finally).

Of course, someone once said that a foolish consistency is the
hobgoblin of little minds...

-Peter