Bikeshedding is right ;) I'm probably a weirdo but I like the Java style when the type name is the acronym in its entirety, but the .NET style when you mix it up with other stuff.
e.g. I prefer GC<> to Gc<>, but then I prefer SimpleHttpServer to SimpleHTTPServer :P Guess I'm +0.5 on both? On Fri, 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<https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev> > -- *Tom Lee */ http://tomlee.co / @tglee <http://twitter.com/tglee>
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
