|
|
Posted by Richard Levasseur on 10/16/34 11:54
Tony Marston wrote:
> > It has little to do with programmer preference.
> > However, it has grown into a feature most people want.
>
> Most people don't *want* this "feature", they are forced into it. When you
> have worked for many years with case insensitive software then encounter the
> problems created with case sensitive software you realise what a stupid idea
> it really is. Given the choice most programmers would chosse software which
> creates fewer problems for them, wich means choosing case insensitive
> software.
>
Thats why is most every language today case sensitive and no one
complains? Or why class names are now case sensitive (when doing
get_class())? Or why function names are now stored in their declared
case instead of all lowercase?
> > Additionally, the case sensitivity of a language has no bearing on how
> > easy it is to determine if a token is a variable, function call, object
> > instantiation, etc. This is determined by the grammar rules and syntax
> > of the language. And, if the grammer requires certain tokens to be of
> > a certain case, then its not a very good case-insensitive language.
> > Again, case has absolutely nothing to do with how easy it is to
> > identify what token a string of characters are.
>
> Then why is it that some posters have created their own standards whereby
> the use of case identifies whether something is a constant, variable,
> function or method, and they now want to enforce those standards on eeryone
> else?
>
Again: From a compiler design perspective, case does not affect the
ease of identifying a token. The ease of identifying a token depends
on the grammar of the language. I said nothing about personal
conventions.
> > Finally: My whole previous post was a joke. Lighten up. The shift key
> > isn't the end of the (programming) world.
>
> I still maintain my position that case sensitive software creates more
> problems than it solves, therefore it is a Bad Thing (tm).
>
And you still need to lighten up.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|