Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 13:12:43 03/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 05, 2004 at 13:08:46, Heiner Marxen wrote: >On March 05, 2004 at 11:08:29, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >>On March 05, 2004 at 10:44:49, Roberto Nerici wrote: >> >>>>When we are at it, why does almost everyone today uses camel case for namnig >>>>variables? >>>> >>>>doYouThinkThatCamelCaseIsEasierForReading >>>>or_maybe_using_underscores_is_more_readable ?! >>>> >>>>The coding conventions of Windows API, MFC, Java, C# all use camel case for >>>>variables. STL is the only place where I can see underscores used. >>> >>>If you're using hungarian notation, you're probably already starting variables >>>with a lower case letter... >>> >>>I always used to use CapitalisedWords for variables and words_with_underscores >>>for functions. But I tend to use the former for everything now. Don't know >>>why... shorter? >> >>But isn't it easier to read underscored variables? Compare these two: >> >>variableUsingCamelCaseNamingStartsWithLowerCase >>variable_using_underscores_to_seperate_its_parts >> >>Is it only me that has an easier time reading the latter? > >No, you are not the only one: I agree with you, here. > >But then, I _do_ use _both_ notations: underscores in function names, >and CamelCase (funny word, just learned it in this thread) for types. PascalCase camelCase I guess the following Microsoft document is the source of that name: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/cpgenref/html/cpconcapitalizationstyles.asp > > >Cheers, >Heiner
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.