Mixed case is industry standard? What industry, mainframe assembler, or C programming industry standard? Come on. This is just more C programmers trying to foist the mixed case abomination off onto the mainframe in order to make us conform to what they are used to. Honestly, it IS more error prone to have that ridiculous mixed case approach than mono-case. Upper or lower, I don't care which, but it DOES avoid more headaches. And the 'headaches' that are described for the pre-trained mixed-case readers is because of a normal need to de-train your mind from mixed case reading. I encountered the same situation when I first entered the mainframe area. That's normal. However, trying to make all mainframers, admittedly a small group now, to conform to you is a bit pushy, wouldn't you think? -------------------------------------------- On Fri, 2/21/14, Automatic digest processor <[email protected]> wrote:
Subject: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) To: "Recipients of ASSEMBLER-LIST digests" <[email protected]> Date: Friday, February 21, 2014, 11:00 PM ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) LISTSERV at the University of Georgia ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) Table of contents: HLASM continuation... (18) CamelCase Field Names (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (8) HLASM continuation... Re: HLASM continuation... (02/20) From: Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Martin Truebner <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: robin <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Peter Relson <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Tony Thigpen <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: John McKown <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: John Gilmore <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: John Gilmore <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: John Gilmore <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Jon Perryman <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Ed Jaffe <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Steve Comstock <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: John Gilmore <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Ed Jaffe <[email protected]> Re: HLASM continuation... (02/21) From: Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> CamelCase Field Names (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) CamelCase Field Names (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/21) From: Ed Jaffe <[email protected]> Re: CamelCase Field Names (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/21) From: Tony Thigpen <[email protected]> Re: CamelCase Field Names (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/21) From: John Gilmore <[email protected]> Re: CamelCase Field Names (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/21) From: Ed Jaffe <[email protected]> Re: CamelCase Field Names (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/21) From: Tony Harminc <[email protected]> Re: CamelCase Field Names (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/21) From: Ed Jaffe <[email protected]> Re: CamelCase Field Names (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/21) From: Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> Re: CamelCase Field Names (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/21) From: John Gilmore <[email protected]> Browse the ASSEMBLER-LIST online archives.
