[cfe-dev] draft rule for naming types/functions/variables

[Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x)]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 9:36 PM, Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x) <wan at google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 9:30 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote:
>> Sorry, this seems to have not followed the thread, but here was my comment:
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/3264041/diff/1/docs/CodingStandards.html#newcode801
>> docs/CodingStandards.html:801: camel case (e.g. <tt>TextFileReader</tt>
>> and <tt>isLValue</tt>).
>> I would really prefer some stylistic difference between variables and
>> types/functions. This is mostly a problem (for me) with local variables,
>> where having some signifier of the locality helps me in reading it.
>
> Agreed.  That's why types start with upper-case while variables start
> with lower-case in my proposal.
>
> I chose to start function names with lower-case, but don't feel
> strongly about it.  If people prefer them to start with upper-case,
> fine by me.

The reason I feel comfortable with using the same style for both
functions and variables is that in the vast majority of the cases, a
function name is followed by () (so the distinction between the two is
obvious).
>
>> The most common style I have worked with is to use
>> under_score_separators for variables. Personally, I would advocate for
>> sharing this style with member variables as well, but those aren't as
>> important to me when reading code.
>
> I think camelCase works as well as underscore_separated for variable
> names, and the former is much more common in the existing code.
> That's why I picked it.  I could go with underscore_separated were we
> starting from scratch.
>
> --
> Zhanyong
>



-- 
Zhanyong