On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Eric Jablow <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Mar 14, 4:20 pm, Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2011/3/14 Alexey Zinger <[email protected]> > > > > > I certainly agree that a few people in our community have a strange sense > of > > readability, such as people who think that ":->>" is a fine name for a > > method <http://twitter.com/#!/psnively/status/47304518869848065> (here > is my > > original tweet <http://twitter.com/#!/cbeust/status/47151793817403392>) > :-) > > > > I do wish that Java would allow Unicode equivalents for certain > operators. In a UTF-8 source code file, if (a ≤ b) seems preferable to if > (a <= b). > Well, that's a slightly different debate and I'm feeling a bit more open to that idea. I think it's important for identifiers to contain a minimum number of English words so that you can actually understand and pronounce that name out loud, but non alphabetical characters should make up a very tiny proportion of such names. I can't really come up with a good example off the top of my head, though (e.g. "convertToDegrees()" -> "convertTo°()"). -- Cédric -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
