Re: relaxing studlyCaps requirement?
| From: | Chuck Hagenbuch | Date: | Thu, 02 Aug 2001 14:33:55 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: relaxing studlyCaps requirement? | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-1245@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Quoting Andrei Zmievski <andrei@ispi.net>:
> 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.
But if you remove the requirement, then _everything_ will look funny because if
you use two PEAR classes you're likely to have two different conventions, plus
maybe a _third_ for your own code - if the classes even use the same
conventions consistently internally.
> Perhaps we could have aliases, that is provide both myFunc() and my_func()?
That sounds like really bad bloat.
-chuck
--
Charles Hagenbuch, <chuck@horde.org>
Some fallen angels have their good reasons.