3 ms·
like_using_method_names_like_this is more readable. White space has been in use to separate words since the time of Alciun, and that's the closest way to do it
by einhverfr 14y ago
like_using_method_names_like_this is more readable. White space has been in use to separate words since the time of Alciun, and that's the closest way to do it. Call me conservative but I prefer to stick to the insights of the last 1400 years rather than mangle them horribly ;-)
Oh, and I am not a Ruby developer ;-)
- Dylan16807 14y agoWhitespace is nice but underscores aren't whitespace. They also leave a zigzag effect that isn't wonderful.
- einhverfr 14y agoThey are the closest thing you can have to whitespace. That's the point. Actually come to think of it, they are underlined whitespace ;-) As for a zigzag effect I think CamelCasing is at least that bad, maybe moreso. Wondering if I get points for bringing early Medieval history into a discussion on coding conventions ;-)
- rrreese 14y agoWhat do you mean by zigzag effect?
- batista 14y agoThe it isn't actually word+empty-space+word but word+line-down-below+word so your eyes go zig-zag from the taller glyphs of the word to the low glyph of the underscore (vertical zig zag motion), instead of jumping to the next world (horizontal).
- einhverfr 14y agofunny, I was just checking because I have never noticed my eyes doing that and afaics my eyes still scan horizontally. I don't need to look down to see the underscore. I guess YMMV?