Re: Case for case-sensitivity (Was: Three simple questions)

["David C. Hoos, Sr." <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com>]

There _are_ some recommendations for Ada code formatting
and style (including capitalization) in
http://www.adaic.org/docs/style-guide/95style/html/cover.html

"Frank Christiny" <fchris@pdq.net> wrote in message
news:FF7E28B976F0121D.F97167433B3E2BF3.4FD17582438B6D33@lp.airnews.net...
> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> > By the way, your original question at the top of this page struck me
> > as quite odd.  While C/C++ uses case sensitivity, I always understood
> > that to be part of the Topsy-like development history of the Unix
> > operating system.  To me, it is case-sensitivity that should be
> > (but cannot be) rationalized, as there is never a good reason for
> > allowing TheItem and theItem to be separate variables.
>
>       Unix topsy-turvy?  Man, now you got me going   ;-)
>       As opposed to the Microsoft world, Unix is the doldrums!
>
>       You ask me for the case for case-sensitivity and John English
>    says that:
>
> >Since humans consider 'D' and 'd' to be variant representations of the
> >same letter, why shouldn't programming languages?
>
>       I can address both those questions in this post.
>
>       Not being a partisan of case-sensitivity I can nevertheless
>    assert that, first of all, Humans DO care for case sensitivity,
>    otherwise why have case-sensitivity in the grammar to begin with?
>    Consider the following "overloaded" sentences:
>
>    In the Company of my friend.       In the company of my friend.
>    Ada presentation today.            ADA presentation today.
>    Standing by the Bank.              Standing by the bank.
>
>       As for the computer languages, consider this:
>
> 1. Case sensitivity allows for a greater array of variable naming
>    and semantics.  In case-insensitive languages you cannot reuse a
>    chunk of the english vocabulary because it has already been
>    "privatized".  Not only can you not use "while", but "While", or
>    "WHILE", etc.  Once you define "My_List", the type, you cannot
>    declare "my_List", the object.
>
>    (Weak point.  Of course it's weak.  I told you, I am not out
>    to convince anyone about case-sensitivity).
>
> 2. Case sensitivity standardizes the coding practice of the
>    internals.  Some Ada samples of the different practices I have
>    been able to observe just two months into my introduction to the
>    language:
>
>    WITH Ada.Text_IO               with Ada.Text_IO
>    PROCEDURE Some_Procedure       procedure Some_Procedure
>    my_int : INTEGER;              My_Int : integer;
>    BEGIN                          begin
>       NULL:                          null;
>    END Some_Procedure;            end Some_Procedure;
>
>    With Ada.Text_IO
>    procedure Some_Procedure
>    my_int : INTEGER;
>    begin
>       NULL;
>    end Some_Procedure;
>
>       The first two versions are at least self-consistent.  The
>    galling part is that the code I have to actually maintain at work
>    is the of the latter flavor!  Maybe because it was the result of
>    many tinkerers prior to me.  So, what do I do in this case?
>    Follow the manglers or establish my own personal touch, just to
>    be contrary, ah?  The language manual and rationale do not have
>    any suggestions on this regard, as far as I know.
>
>       Dis I convince you?  Of course not.  You are OK though.
>
> --
> Frank Christiny                       fchris@pdq.net
> Sr. Software Engineer                 Lockheed Martin Space Operations
> Houston, Texas, USA                   http://freeweb.pdq.net/fchris/