in reply to Re^2: Refactoring technique?
in thread Refactoring technique?

Yes, you've read me correctly. There are few who like my approach to naming variables, so I translate into those yucky inconsistent-length variable names when others are likely to be subjected to reading my code.

One engineer, after modifying some of his code to match my naming convention, indicated he really did like the way his code lined up, but he just couldn't bring himself to de-Englishify his variables names just so the code lined up nicely.

I don't Clark other people's code, and I do try to play along when the code isn't going to be strictly mine, but I find a serene and refreshing beauty in consistency and functional abbreviation.

In that, I am definitely a Rare Bird.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Refactoring technique?
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Apr 24, 2015 at 16:06 UTC
    In that, I am definitely a Rare Bird.

    Should that be RarBir? :)

    With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I'm with torvalds on this
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. Agile (and TDD) debunked
[reply]

      LOL! Absolutely.

      Except in my world, the leading usercase letter would indicate it was a Global variable rather than lexically scoped to a nice, controllable scale, and the second uppercase would . . . break my keyboard or something. :-)

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom