Java style. My eyeballs like it better and it 'flows' better visually. The .net humps look ugly.
-- my 2ยข Regards, Paul Nathan Sent from my iPhone On Aug 2, 2013, at 6:28 PM, Patrick Walton <pwal...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Brendan Eich emailed me expressing a preference for `GC<>` over `Gc<>`. I > think now is as good a time as any to have the bikeshedding debate :) > > I've noticed two styles for acronyms in type names: Java style (HTTPServer) > versus .NET style (HttpServer). Currently we are usually using .NET style, > but inconsistently (e.g. ARC). We never really decided. > > Here are a few examples of types in each style: > > * Java style: GC<Foo>, ARC<int>, SimpleHTTPServer, XMLHTTPRequest. > > * .NET style: Gc<Foo>, Arc<int>, SimpleHttpServer, XmlHttpRequest. > > I slightly prefer Java style myself because I think "GC" looks better than > "Gc", because Web APIs use Java style, and because Python does (e.g. > SimpleHTTPServer) and in general we've been following PEP 8. But I don't feel > strongly on this issue. > > Thoughts/straw poll? > > Patrick > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > Rust-dev@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev > _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
