Your explanation couldn't be clearer. I now understand why the underscore doesn't bother me so much even though I'm not such a Heathen as not to use Emacs:
1) I type on a french keyboard and I don't have to shift to get the underscore character (only to get most every other useful character for programming); 2) I'm a fast typist and have never been much a fan of dynamic completion. And with that, perhaps we will let this topic slowly sink into the sunset and get on with useful programming once again :-) -KL J.Pietschmann wrote: [SNIP] > or perhaps being to lazy to properly configure my > default editor, and my keyboard layout causes some > more problems too: > - I hate prefixes which are shared by a lot of > identifiers > - I hate underscores in general > > For the Heathens and the Users Of Inferior Tools out there, > Emacs provides a dynamic completion function for identifiers. > Type in " s u b s <F11>" (or whatever key is used to invoke > the function), and the editor searches the file and will perhaps > present you "subSequenceSpecifier". Repeatedly pressing the > autocompletion key will present other possible completions. > > Obviously this is the reason why I have no fear of long > identifiers, and in fact I *like* them, because random abbrvs > can introduce subtle differences which can be overlooked during > autocompletion. > > Another effect is, if there are more than a few identifiers > in the file (or other files as they are searched too) which > share a common prefix, I have to type the prefix *and* a few > more characters to get the correct completion after the first > or at least after the second hit. That's why I'm not very fond > of prefixes, the longer the worse, and any rules which encode > whatever common information in prefixes. > > Using underscores in the prefix or to separate the prefix from > the real identifier makes it worse again. Obviously, I have to > key in the prefix and the underscore, which presents a few > interesting problems, in particular if the identifier is > camelCased. Keying in the underscore requires using the shift > key. If I miss this due to hasty typing, I get a dash, and the > completion won't complete. If I press the shift key too long, > the character after the underscore is capitalized, which > causes the completion algorithm to be case sensitive, and again > there is no match. Without the underscore, i never bother with > the shift key, because then the completion algorithm is case > insensitive and will even capitalize lower case characters > already typed in if necessary. > (note that this is not all that much a problem with the C > words_separated_by_underscores style, as I can often invoke > the completion successfully before an underscore has to be > typed). > > As I already noted, this can be fixed, and perhaps enhanced > to provide an even more intelligent completion algorithm, but > I'd rather think I'd take advantage of other people's dislikes > and get rules which will be ignored sooner or later anyway > canned before too much efford is wasted to introduce and > enforce them. > > Does this explain and help to understand my position? > > J.Pietschmann > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
