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,c984a7f4a0ab0148 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: non key-words in xemacs to be upper case Date: 1996/08/31 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 177713629 references: <3218214F.419D@lmtas.lmco.com> organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-08-31T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Charles said "FWIW, I follow the Mike Feldman approach. Perhaps its my ALGOL 68 upbringing :-). What I certainly do NOT like is the opposite convention of using lower-case reserved words, as was done in the LRM." In my experience anyone can get used to almost any convention. What is valuable is for everyone to use the same convention, so that silly disagreements on capitalization conventions do not get in the way of code sharing etc. It seems clear that the Ada community largely prefers lower case keywords and mixed case identifiers. I think it is a good idea if the minority that likes other conventions makes an effort to shift. I can say this, because I certainly used to be in this minority, and used to use lower case keywords and ALL UPPER CASE IDENTIFIERS. At first it was painful to switch to Mixed_Case_Identifiers, but now I am completely used to it. What I particularly dislike about Mike's book is that it deliberately departs from standard Ada practice, for what I consider are insufficiently good reasons. It would be as though someone wrote a C book in which they recommended using mixed case for macro names.