CamelCase versus wide_names (Prothon)

[Jan Dries]

Mark Hahn wrote:
> 
> Then I came here and asked and to my surprise I'm finding out that 100% of
> python users want camelCase.  This kind of blows away my argument against
> it.  So camelCase it will be.

In all fairness, you are finding out that 6 of the 8 first people to 
respond to your post prefer CamelCase. The other two didn't voice a 
clear opinion in either direction. While I'm sure that might be 
indicative of some trend, it certainly does not mean 100% of Python 
users want camelCase.

I for one go with AM Kuchling, and prefer wide_names.

When I started programming, I was using C (this was back in the 80's and 
early 90's) and I used to code all in wide_names. I was quite happy with 
it. Then I started writing C++ on Windows, and I gradually started using 
CamelCase and lpszqvwxHungarianNotation, primarily because MFC was using 
it. When Java came out, I followed its camelCase practice as well.
But it wasn't until I moved to Python in 2000 that I realised how much I 
really prefer wide_names. Contrary to what others have written here, I 
find wide_names much more readable than camelCase.

In practice though, I tend to go for whatever convention is customary in 
the environment I work in. And I have long given up the illusion you can 
be 100% consistent in these matters. That's why I rarely get involved in 
discussions like these. But when someone claims 100% of Python users 
want camelCase, I cannot but speak up.

Regards,
Jan