[r6rs-discuss] JAR statement

[Carl Eastlund]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:43 PM, Thomas Lord <lord at emf.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 21:38 -0600, Grant Rettke wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Thomas Lord <lord at emf.net> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 18:24 -0800, Arthur A. Gleckler wrote:
>> >
>> >>   Type type = new Type();
>> >
>> >
>> > What asshat writes that kind of code?
>>
>> Every Java and C# programmer out there.
>
> Oh, THEM... well, good then.  They don't come
> around here.  There's nothing to worry about.

This kind of convention is not a unique phenomenon to case
sensitivity.  In ML, for instance, types and values live in different
namespaces.  You can easily have (int : int) and (string : string) and
so forth (and ML programmers do), without even a capital letter to
remind you of which is which.

Scheme has the potential for such distinctions as well -- bindings in
different phases, for instance, or macros where the transformer might
have a local binding and the code it generates might have one of the
same name (which may be at the same or different phase).

Case sensitivity or lack thereof doesn't limit our ability to generate
truly awful coding conventions.

--
Carl Eastlund