"Jonathan Earle" <jearle@nortelnetworks.com>:
> I prefer descriptive variable and function names - like comments, they help
> to make code so much easier to read.
>
> One thing I wonder though... why do people prefer 'some_function_name()'
> over 'SomeFunctionName()'? I personally don't like the underscore character
> - it's an odd character to type when you're trying to get the name typed in,
> and the shifted character, I find, is easier to input.
Code is written by the few.
Code is read by the many, and having _ in there makes it MUCH easier to
read. Visual comparison of "SomeFunctionName" and "some_function_name"
is faster even for a coder where there may be a typo (try dropping a character)
or mis identifing two different symbols with similar names:
d_hash_mask
d_hash_shift
This is relatively easy to read. conversely:
DHashMask
DHashShift
Are more difficult to spot.
In this case "The good of the many outweigh the good of the few".
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesse I Pollard, II
Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil
Any opinions expressed are solely my own.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 23 2001 - 21:00:27 EST