🚀 go-pugleaf

rjh@snakemail.hut.fi (Rami Juhani A H{nninen) writes:


> 
> 	A New Feature in GCC: enforced naming style, part 2 (again long)
> 	----------------------------------------------------------------

>I constantly write in IMHO -mode, so please don't think that I claim
>that everything I write is absolutely true. Instead I try to offer
>grounds and reasons why something I suggest might be reasonable. I
>might be wrong, of course. Just prove it to me, please.

>Although this second article is (again) long, please read it trough
>before answering. I ask this because I got several flaming notes from
>people who clearly had not read the whole previous article. Also,
>please post your answers instead of mailing them, because I would
>like to keep this discussion as open as possible.

Well, I have read it all, and I still don't like it.

Making it easier to maintain software is fine, but the type *is* no
problem. You can find that kind of info with a good class browser of
some kind. 

I've been looking at a few lines of code, and when I have found an
unknown object, I've always wanted to find the definition of a class.
I've been screaming my head off for sources, but I've never cared if
something is an int or a double. 

	Johan