From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d95b511473b3a931 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: asch@aisb.ed.ac.uk (Andreas Schoter) Subject: Re: Language Choice and Coding style Date: 1996/06/24 Message-ID: <4qm5eu$edt@scotsman.ed.ac.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 161841401 references: organization: Edinburgh University newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-06-24T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Nasser Abbasi (nasser@apldbio.com) wrote: : I'd like to research this further and find out how do Cobol and PLi and : Basic and other programmer write, and see if there is a correlation : between the emotional/cultural profile of the programmer and between : the tyep of the language they use and the manner of which they write : in it. Well, Prolog has certain typographical conventions: any identifier beginning with an upper case letter is a variable, so naturally VariableNames tend to LookLikeThis, whilst any identifier beginning with a lower case letter is an atom, so by analogy, I guess, atom_names tend to look_like_this. Since both idioms exist in the programs that I read/write I actually don't find either to be harder to read than the other... Oh, and I seem to have carried the same typographical convention over to my C and SML programming, except in C, of course, there are also DEFINED_CONSTANTS and keywords. Am I glad there's such a thing as colour-coded syntax highlighting! And the next question, why am I wasting my time with this? -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Andreas Schoter Discovery and Reasoning in Mathematics asch@dai.ed.ac.uk University of Edinburgh http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/staff/personal_pages/asch/index.html -----------------------------------------------------------------------------