[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Naming convention

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 35 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 35 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

"Michael Sperber [Mr. Preprocessor]" wrote:
> >>>>> "felix" == felixundduni  <felix> writes:
> felix> Is there a particular reason why condition types are prefixed
> felix> with "&"?
> Uh, yeah, so that they are recognizable as condition types.
> felix> I find this rather ugly. One just has to take a look at PLT's
> felix> units/signatures to see a how such syntactical conventions can
> felix> go totally haywire.
> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder; I rather like PLT's naming
> conventions.  Can you be more specific as to what you mean by "go
> totally haywire"?  Alternative suggestions?

I find all those @'s and ^'s highly offensive. It breaks the flow
and makes the code less readable (IMHO). YMMV of course.

I like the names proposed by Mr. Stone.