Readability and naming.

[Steve Horne]

On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 16:25:41 +0000 (UTC), Mike Gerfin
<gerfin at ieee.org> wrote:

>Haha, nice.  I'll agree, naming can be abused in both directions.

Yeah - the real pain, though, is that there is no clear rule for where
the happy medium is. This is one debate that's never going to end,
basically, and 90% of the time you'll find that the people arguing
each side aren't really so far different as they think.

On the w_count vs. l_count, for me, it's a grey area. It depends on
the context. Abbreviating the differing part (word vs. line) seems odd
when you have the 'count' bit specified in full, but that depends on
context too. If you have lots of variables relating to words and
lines, and these are the only two that hold counts, it makes sense.
Also, how long should a sane and non-compulsive developer spend
analysing whether he's chosen the exact right identifier names?

Of course my reaction here is mainly a kneejerk thing - I've read too
many style guides in my time, and react badly to anything that hints
at a 'one true style' approach, even when that isn't what people are
really hinting at. It's kind of a Pavlovian thing I suppose.

As for underscores, though, you're all just so horribly wrong.
Underscores are lovely. Everyone should use underscores ;-)

-- 
Remove 'wants' and 'nospam' from e-mail.