Hi, On January 29, 2024 2:09:23 PM PST, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: >> On 2024-01-29 15:01:06 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >>> And it still baffles me why we allow everyone to pick their own system for >>> capitalizing identifiers out of a hat, without even insisting on consistency >>> from one end of the same identifier to the other. > >> Yes. Please. I hate some capitalization/underscore styles, but I hate >> spending >> time feeling out which capitalization style I should use so much more. Let's >> at least define some minimal naming guidelines for new code. > >I'm for this for entirely-new code, but I think when adding code in >existing modules we're better off with the rule of "make it match >nearby code". I admit it might be hard to draw a clear line between >the two cases, plus there might be local inconsistency already. >But let's try to avoid making local style inconsistencies worse.
Yeah, completely agreed. I think using it as a tie breaker when extending already inconsistent code, of which we have plenty, is the extent of the role it should have when extending existing code. Andres -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
