Hi,
On January 29, 2024 2:09:23 PM PST, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>Andres Freund <andres@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.