It has long been a POV-Ray recommendation that identifiers have at least one
uppercase letter, although this is not enforced.  This recommendation has
practical significance, as we recently saw in "Spanish Patio -Parse Error" in
povray.general.

I propose that this recommendation be incorporated as policy into the Object
Collection naming standards.  In other words, in order for a submission to be
rated "fully compliant," all identifiers introduced must have at least one
uppercase letter.

Post a reply to this message

On 1-8-2012 5:46, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> It has long been a POV-Ray recommendation that identifiers have at least one
> uppercase letter, although this is not enforced.  This recommendation has
> practical significance, as we recently saw in "Spanish Patio -Parse Error" in
> povray.general.
>
> I propose that this recommendation be incorporated as policy into the Object
> Collection naming standards.  In other words, in order for a submission to be
> rated "fully compliant," all identifiers introduced must have at least one
> uppercase letter.
>

I second that.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Am 01.08.2012 08:59, schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> On 1-8-2012 5:46, Cousin Ricky wrote:
>> It has long been a POV-Ray recommendation that identifiers have at
>> least one
>> uppercase letter, although this is not enforced.  This recommendation has
>> practical significance, as we recently saw in "Spanish Patio -Parse
>> Error" in
>> povray.general.
>>
>> I propose that this recommendation be incorporated as policy into the
>> Object
>> Collection naming standards.  In other words, in order for a
>> submission to be
>> rated "fully compliant," all identifiers introduced must have at least
>> one
>> uppercase letter.
>>
>
> I second that.

I third that.

Post a reply to this message

> Am 01.08.2012 08:59, schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> On 1-8-2012 5:46, Cousin Ricky wrote:
>>> It has long been a POV-Ray recommendation that identifiers have at
>>> least one
>>> uppercase letter, although this is not enforced.  This recommendation
>>> has
>>> practical significance, as we recently saw in "Spanish Patio -Parse
>>> Error" in
>>> povray.general.
>>>
>>> I propose that this recommendation be incorporated as policy into the
>>> Object
>>> Collection naming standards.  In other words, in order for a
>>> submission to be
>>> rated "fully compliant," all identifiers introduced must have at least
>>> one
>>> uppercase letter.
>>>
>>
>> I second that.
>
> I third that.
>
I totaly agree with all of you.

Post a reply to this message

As a addition to this, why don't we use the hungarian notation. Makes coding
much clearer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_notation
This will explain what I mean

Post a reply to this message

Le 04/08/2012 10:15, BertvdB nous fit lire :
> As a addition to this, why don't we use the hungarian notation. Makes coding
> much clearer.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_notation
> This will explain what I mean

Because there is so few "types" in SDL. Value, vectors... from 2D to 5D...
what else ? a spline ?

Hungarian notation is dead. Let it rest.

Better use meaningful identifiers!

Post a reply to this message

Am 04.08.2012 18:16, schrieb Le_Forgeron:
> Le 04/08/2012 10:15, BertvdB nous fit lire :
>> As a addition to this, why don't we use the hungarian notation. Makes coding
>> much clearer.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_notation
>> This will explain what I mean
>
> Because there is so few "types" in SDL. Value, vectors... from 2D to 5D...
> what else ? a spline ?
>
> Hungarian notation is dead. Let it rest.

It's dead because modern IDEs have stuff like "IntelliSense" that allow 
you to see a variable's type just by hovering the mouse over it. 
POV-Ray's IDE doesn't have such a feature.

It's also quite a common practice in POV-Ray to prefix function names 
with "f", texture variables with "t" or "tx", material variables with 
"m" or "mt", etc.

That said, I absolutely, positively agree that Hungarian notation should 
/not/ be forced on anyone - just like any other religion :-P


> Better use meaningful identifiers!

Always a good idea, whether using Hungarian notation or not.

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> That said, I absolutely, positively agree that Hungarian notation should
> /not/ be forced on anyone - just like any other religion :-P
>
>
> > Better use meaningful identifiers!
>
> Always a good idea, whether using Hungarian notation or not.
 Rape, Murder
Before you know they will stop attending church on sunday

Post a reply to this message

> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> That said, I absolutely, positively agree that Hungarian notation should
>> /not/ be forced on anyone - just like any other religion :-P
>>
>>
>>> Better use meaningful identifiers!
>>
>> Always a good idea, whether using Hungarian notation or not.
>   Rape, Murder
> Before you know they will stop attending church on sunday
>
>
>
Anyway, religions are only feeble attempts at making sence of the world 
around us when you lack the proper tools and knowlege.
Look at the Bible, ponder how many centuries it have been passed along 
by oral tradition, and you can only conclude that it's a compilation of 
legends, miths, tall tales, fables and fire side stories...

Post a reply to this message

"BertvdB" <ber### [at] kpnmailnl> wrote:
> As a addition to this, why don't we use the hungarian notation. Makes coding
> much clearer.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_notation
> This will explain what I mean

The purpose of the naming standard is to insure that the various modules work
well with each other, not to enforce political correctness.  I would add playing
nice with POV-Ray itself, which is why I made my suggestion.  While Hungarian
notation, or a less dogmatic variation thereof, may be a good idea, it does not
further the purpose of the standard.

Post a reply to this message