CamelCase versus wide_names (Prothon)

[Hans Nowak]

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?

That would be wide_names.  CamelCase would be tolerable.  In my own code, I use 
a mixture: CamelCase for class names, wide_names for everything else (inspired 
by older Python code).  Not mixedCase, mind you; IMHO, that's an atrocity.  If 
you're going to use caps in names, then at least the first letter should be 
capitalized.  Putting the capitals somewhere in the middle but not in the front 
seems very unnatural to me.

-- 
Hans (hans at zephyrfalcon.org)
http://zephyrfalcon.org/