On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:43 PM, Thomas Lord <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 21:38 -0600, Grant Rettke wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Thomas Lord <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 18:24 -0800, Arthur A. Gleckler wrote: >> > >> >> Type type = new Type(); >> > >> > >> > What asshat writes that kind of code? >> >> Every Java and C# programmer out there. > > Oh, THEM... well, good then. They don't come > around here. There's nothing to worry about.
This kind of convention is not a unique phenomenon to case sensitivity. In ML, for instance, types and values live in different namespaces. You can easily have (int : int) and (string : string) and so forth (and ML programmers do), without even a capital letter to remind you of which is which. Scheme has the potential for such distinctions as well -- bindings in different phases, for instance, or macros where the transformer might have a local binding and the code it generates might have one of the same name (which may be at the same or different phase). Case sensitivity or lack thereof doesn't limit our ability to generate truly awful coding conventions. -- Carl Eastlund _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
