|
|
Posted by Gertjan Klein on 07/31/06 07:16
Shelly wrote:
>"Gertjan Klein" <gklein@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
>news:5anmc2d5a53bmlll7ujia8sbu59vh2dr4t@4ax.com...
>>
>> No, it does not. What you have described are conventions used in the
>> case of symbols to make their "type" (constant, variable, function,
>> whatever) clear. These conventions are useful for languages that have no
>> other means to distinguish between these types. [...]
>
>I **KNOW** they are only conventions, and they can be used by sloppy
>programmers in the wrong manner, but they are conventions that are
>universally followed by all professional programmers. Therein lies its
>usefulness.
Again, you seem to confuse programming conventions with case
sensitivity. They are not the same thing. As I stated above, I have no
issues with conventions that assign meaning to the case used (in
languages that need them -- not all do). I would not mind following
those conventions if working on a project where they are used.
I don't have big issues with case sensitive languages, either -- I've
worked with both case-sensitive and case-insensitive languages, and I
rarely find case-sensitivity the biggest problem with a language. I do,
however, agree with Tony (albeit without his emotions on the subject)
that the benefits of case-sensitivity are small, if they exist at all,
and don't outweigh the potential disadvantages.
Many posters in this thread seem to forget that all this is a matter of
personal preference. The arguments used in this thread as to why someone
arrives at a certain preference are often attacked with an emotional
ferociousness [1] that is unbecoming of a professional programmer.
Gertjan.
[1] This is not directed at you, personally.
--
Gertjan Klein <gklein@xs4all.nl>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|