From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_50 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 21 Nov 91 22:22:53 GMT
From: agate!spool.mu.edu!mips!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!usenet.coe.montan
a.edu!milton!mfeldman@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (Michael Feldman)
Subject: Re: Public Forum Issue/Nitpick
Message-ID: <1991Nov21.222253.1040@milton.u.washington.edu>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <815@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu> wellerd@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (David Weller) write
s:
 [ stuff deleted ]
>
>OK, for those of you remaining (and I HOPE somebody from SPC is 
>still here :-), here's my point:
>The AQ&S Guide points out (section 2.1? Don't have it next to me
>right now -- pretty good way to let you think this is an "informed"
>opinion, huh?) that their recommendation, and the case style followed
>throughout the guide, is lower case reserved words and everything
>else in UPPER_CASE.  They quickly go on to point out that case usage
>is a matter of taste (hence it's debatability), and that individual
>organizations should set a style and follow it.  I claim that this
>is preposterous, or at the least, unfair.  

I think you mean that their inconsistency is preposterous. I agree. 
Either they're endorsing the LRM style or they're not. AQ&S is a fine
bureaucratic document in that every time they take a stand, they
immediately back away from it. I don't happen to agree with the LRM
style, either.
>
>In my previous organizations that used Ada (two of 'em , not counting
>my current employer), "The Management" decided that the format in the
>LRM was sufficient for a coding "standard", and thus employed the
>style ENDORSED by SPC (Note carefully the trigger word <--).  In 
>neither case did "The Management" evaluate the "why"s as to case
>usage.  It was in the LRM, so that was the law.  It was also an
>acceptable compromise between their old language (which required
>upper case), and the "new" language (which was case sensitive,
>which, IMVHO, was infinitely dumber than all upper case).  

Hmmm. In defense of SPC, they can't be held responsible for managers
who won't put their brains in gear.

 [ stuff deleted ]

>
>          My proposal, and I dare say I have found this to
>be a widely accepted approach, is lower case reserved words
>and mixed case identifiers.  My justification: ALL UPPER CASE
>WORDS _DECREASE_ READING COMPREHENSION, OUR BRAINS HAVE NOT
>BEEN TRAINED TO "READ" ALL UPPER CASE WORDS UNLESS YOU'RE
>A 30 YEAR COBOL/FORTRAN DINOSAUR!!!  (Please, gentle reader, should 

 [ stuff deleted ]

>in accordance with netland rules (sec. 5.1, para. 13), which
>states I may use upper case to indicate YELLING!!!).
>
Yes, I've used this on the net. Too often, in some readers' opinion :-)

Seriously, as a teacher of first-year students, I happen to believe in
the importance of brainwashing them with templates like the usual
control structures. We learn by absorbing patterns, and the "combs"
of control structures are some of these templates. Ergo, I use
UPPER-CASE for reserved words, and mixed case for other stuff.
I am not alone, even in the Ada world; even Norm Cohen did it in his book.

On the other hand, I've had to put on my asbestos suit for the flames
I've gotten from some quarters in the Ada world, for DARING to
deviate from the LRM in my book. Upper-cased reserved words?
HERESY! Burn the infidel!

In freshman-CS-teaching circles, there are 2 religions on this: put
reserved words in lower case to emphasize what comes between them, or
put them in upper case to emphasize them. A student who survives the
first semester is capable of joining whatever religion his subsequent
teachers or managers impose. The reserved-word issue is a minor one,
except in the freshman semester, where we'll fight for our religions
to the very death. Check your Pascal texts for examples of both.

I agree unequivocally that USING UPPER CASE FOR MOST OF THE PROGRAM,
INCLUDING LONG IDENTIFIERS, is jarring, counterintuitive to readers
of English, and therefore a stupid rule to set. Since you were at Tri-Ada,
you might have heard Jan Hext, the Australian who gave one of the
education keynote talks, say that the ALL UPPER CASE convention is also
responsible for getting Ada a lot of bad press among teachers. I agree.

SPC would do well to change their endorsement of the LRM convention 
(WHICH EVEN THE LRM ITSELF ADMITS IS ONLY ONE OF A NUMBER OF
CONVENTIONS) to a set of examples of different styles, admonishing
managers to choose one consistently.

BTW - there is a different style used in Europe, and it's supported
by several prettyprinters. I don't recall the details - does anyone
else out there?

Wishing you all good luck with your case religions, I remain

Mike