Acronyms/intialism use capital letters to encode information about words. Losing that information is a mistake. SᴍᴀʟʟCᴀᴘCᴀsᴇ is now considered a best practice.
…Or consider snake_case or kebab-case 🤷
ExtensibleMarkupLanguageHypertextTransferProtocolRequest
This person Javas…
Wouldn’t that imply the existence of a
ExtensibleMarkupLanguageHypertextTransferProtocolRequestFactorySingleton?And an AbstractExtensibleMarkupLanguageHypertextTransformerProtocolRequestFactorySingletonBuilder!
Sadly you can’t build a singleton.
AbstractExtensibleMarkupLanguageHypertextTransformerProtocolRequestFactoryBuilder$Companion?80 char line maximum? I read that as minimum. My bad.
AbstractExtensibleMarkupLanguageHypertextTransformerProtocolRequestFactorySingletonBuilderDecoratorDelegationStrategyDispatcher
Doing that with GNU or WINE will use your entire memory
GNU’s Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix CORE DUMP: OUT OF MEMORY EXCEPTION
Needs more AbstractSingletonBeanProxyFactoryDefaultImplementation
Acronyms/intialism use capital letters to encode information about words. Losing that information is a mistake. SᴍᴀʟʟCᴀᴘCᴀsᴇ is now considered a best practice.
…Or I dunno try snake_case or kebab-case 🤷
XHR boom. Sue me :)
OP is dead now. Are you happy?
Yes!
May OP request in peace
I regret nothing!
id throw away all of these if they aren’t struct definitions, which they aren’t.
xhr
I don’t like to sticking to generalized naming conventions when autofill or intellisense is a thing. Make your names clear in whatever way you think works best, and developers still using vim can set up autocomplete using an extension or something
Dear god please no. This way madness lies. Your idea of “whatever you think works best” is not going to line up with whatever the next person that comes along thinks, and your codebase is about to get all kinds of fucked up.
Thinking code complete is going to save you is naive. Even in languages like C and Java, where it works best, you still need to be able to read and understand the code in context. There’s no hope in a language like Ruby with all it’s meta programming stuff
I’m not suggesting randomness or inconsistency, I’m saying generalizing is overkill. But you’re right, “whatever works” might be taken too literal by some
You’re absolutely right that depending on your autofill is not a good general approach either. Then again, you shouldn’t be guessing at these either
I’ve worked with changing conventions in different teams. In the end people are not going to come up with some name and whether it’s myOldThing or my_old_thing won’t matter much. Usually I just follow whatever the team I’m working with prefers
Yes and no. I agree that camel vs snake or that stupid mNameThing that was popular for a while, doesn’t reeeeeaaally matter, although I would argue that convention over the language still has value. As an example, naming a Java variable with a capital letter would be confusing and annoying to any new devs joining the project, even if it’s a valid identifier. Also it’s handy to be able to look at something in ALL_CAPS and know that it’s probably a static final, without having to check it’s definition. I guess it’s about finding that line between useful conventions and pedantry.
