Re: relaxing studlyCaps requirement?
| From: | Andrei Zmievski | Date: | Thu, 02 Aug 2001 13:54:04 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: relaxing studlyCaps requirement? | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-1244@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, 02 Aug 2001, Tomas V.V.Cox wrote:
> I don't have a radical opinion like Chuck, but IMO at least "public"
> methods should follow the convention. Every of us knows the advantages
> of having a strinct convention in terms of speed of coding (don't need
> to remember what convention followed the autor) and code readability
> (all the code looks similar).
I was one of the people who requested the relaxation of studlyCaps
convention. Personally, I don't like it and it looks funny when I mix
in PEAR classes with my other code that doesn't use studlyCaps. Perhaps
we could have aliases, that is provide both myFunc() and my_func()?
-Andrei
"Man, if you gotta ask, you'll never know."
- Louis Armstrong, when asked "What is jazz?"