>>>>> On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 15:06:19 +0000, Derek M Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Derek> Identifier naming conventions are often mentioned.
Derek> However, I have checked many programs conformance to naming
Derek> conventions that their authors claim to be following, only
Derek> to find many exceptions.
Just because there are exceptions doesn't mean there aren't
conventions. Conventions are not mandatory and are not (often)
systematically checked. Moreover conventions often actually include
subtle exceptions to their general injunctions that a na�ve level of
checking might miss.
Derek> It has been said that different languages have naming
Derek> conventions that are specific to them. I have found no
Derek> evidence for this claim (apart from Fortran names often
Derek> being short).
Eh? The evidence is all around. For example, are you disputing that
the following is a type name, by convention, in Dylan?
<foo>
Unlike C++, or some other languages, the angle brackets are not part
of the grammar of the language. They are just constituent characters
in the identifier itself. The identifier is not called "foo". It
really is called "<foo>". Moreover there is nothing to stop Dylan
programmers calling their types "foo", or "Foo", or "-FOO-". It is
just a convention encouraged by the designers of the language to put
angle brackets around type names.
__Jason
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PPIG Discuss List ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Discuss admin: http://limitlessmail.net/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Announce admin: http://limitlessmail.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
PPIG Discuss archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss%40ppig.org/
