So, to respond to the one comment, it was ok for the Science guys to want mixed 
case things because that was what they were used to.  Ok, I can buy that.  Same 
rationale can be applied to the C programmers.  Now, let's be fair, using the 
very same reasoning, I can then justify MY perception that mixed case shouldn't 
be used on the mainframe, because I am used to it.  Now, if you say they can 
justify their actions out of their preferrences and I can NOT do the same 
thing, then you surely can see how that is not fair for everyone, right?
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 2/24/14, Automatic digest processor <[email protected]> wrote:

 Subject: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 23 Feb 2014 to 24 Feb 2014 (#2014-32)
 To: "Recipients of ASSEMBLER-LIST digests" <[email protected]>
 Date: Monday, February 24, 2014, 11:01 PM

 ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 23 Feb 2014
 to 24 Feb 2014 (#2014-32)





 LISTSERV at the University of Georgia





















 ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 23 Feb 2014 to 24 Feb 2014
 (#2014-32)

 Table of contents:

 CamelCase Field Names (Was:
 Re: HLASM continuation...) (5)
 ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 20
 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (10)
 camelCase et al


 CamelCase Field Names (Was:
 Re: HLASM continuation...)
 Re: CamelCase Field Names
 (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/24)
 From: Peter Relson <[email protected]>
 Re: CamelCase Field Names
 (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/24)
 From: Ray Mullins <[email protected]>
 Re: CamelCase Field Names
 (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/24)
 From: Ed Jaffe <[email protected]>
 Re: CamelCase Field Names
 (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/24)
 From: Chuck Arney <[email protected]>
 Re: CamelCase Field Names
 (Was: Re: HLASM continuation...) (02/24)
 From: Phil Smith III <[email protected]>
 ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest - 20
 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29)
 Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest
 - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (02/24)
 From: John Walker <[email protected]>
 Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest
 - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (02/24)
 From: Gord Tomlin
 <[email protected]>
 Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest
 - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (02/24)
 From: zMan <[email protected]>
 Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest
 - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (02/24)
 From: John McKown
 <[email protected]>
 Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest
 - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (02/24)
 From: Tom Thackrey <[email protected]>
 Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest
 - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (02/24)
 From: John Gilmore <[email protected]>
 Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest
 - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (02/24)
 From: Kirk Talman <[email protected]>
 Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest
 - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (02/24)
 From: Kirk Talman <[email protected]>
 Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest
 - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (02/24)
 From: Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]>
 Re: ASSEMBLER-LIST Digest
 - 20 Feb 2014 to 21 Feb 2014 (#2014-29) (02/24)
 From: Ed Jaffe
 <[email protected]>
 camelCase et al
 camelCase et al
 (02/24)
 From: Kirk Talman <[email protected]>






 Browse the ASSEMBLER-LIST
 online archives.

Reply via email to