Matt Miller: Both camps are wrong in trying to force their viewpoint on the world.
Forcing an opinion requires limiting someone's choice. I have consistently expressed that case sensitivity in a programming language (not
a human language) offers choices that are not available in programming languages that are not case sensitive. This is about about choice. However, the scope into which that choice is applied is up to the organization that has adopted a particular viewpoint on the question. I honestly don't care if the world adopts my standards. I do care if the world decides that it would be more convenient for them to cease to support a technology upon which my standards depend. That is forcing a viewpoint, and if done with a tool like SQL Server, it is doing so on the world.[/p]
Matt Miller: I can't believe that it would be so very difficult to set up case sensitivity as a compiler option, that could then be picked on a project by project basis.
Excellent choice. I agree. This is likely a one-way street, as once you have a base of code that may have different capitalizations for the same symbol, you may have a hard time going back the other way, limiting options for those that come after you. It is such a rarity these days for a developer to last more than a couple years at a particular organization, so this decision must be made carefully, and deliberately, and with full awareness of the consequences.
Sene Bauman: whew, can we say anger management. If your intent was not to insult with your comments, you failed miserably. In fact, what is interesting is that your tirade was actually in agreement with the people you were yelling at.
I apologize if my comments seemed angry, but disagreements and criticism hardly qualify as anger, no matter how forcefully expressed. It is unfair to me and to free discussion in general to resort to ad hominem comments. If I wanted to yell, I WOULD USE ALL CAPITALS. Not to belabor a point, but (a) all capitals gets your attention, and (b) it does change the meaning of the statement, even in written language intended for consumption by other people. For the record, I was not actually yelling, but if you think I was, you made my point for me.
Sene Bauman: Capitalization in language does not changer meaning, which was Phil's and my point. It changes style or emphasis.
I agree that in language intended for person-to-person communication, capitalization has much less significance than for computer programming languages. But, capitalization is significant for a lot of compilers and interpreters, no matter your opinion on whether it helps or hurts programmers in part or in whole. For C-based and many other languages, capitalization is factually more than style or emphasis. I simply do not understand the argument that if something makes sense for a person, despite the capitalization, it should make sense to a compiler. Is Lisp code "bad" because it is hard to read? Clearly not. Is COBOL code "bad" because it is so easy to read? No.
Sene Bauman: Select means select whether it is spelled "SELECT" or "sElEcT".
To SQL and people, yes, "SELECT" and "select" have the same meaning. To C, they do not have the same meaning, whether you like it or not.
Sene Bauman: Take you argument about the bntOK object. I can see no circumstances where it would be advantageous to create objects okBTN, oKBtn, OkBTN, adnauseum.
Neither can I. But as I stated clearly, if one has the option to abuse their freedom, it does not make it right to do so.
Sene Bauman: If anything is implies a degree of mean spiritedness and elitism and creates havoc with anyone trying to work on your code. So as I said before, using upper/lower case for clarity(style) is fine but the compiler should ignore it and not produce a syntax error.
Mean spiritedness and elitism? Creates havoc? I think removing someone's options is much more mean-spirited and elitist. If my compiler suddenly stopped caring about capitalization, then havoc would surely ensue to the same degree as if your compiler started to care about it. If I did not want to have to worry about capitalization, I would not be using the language and compiler I am using presently. But that should be my choice, and mine alone, to make.
Sene Bauman: If you want to force standards, than all you need to work on are text editors that force the output to be styled correctly regardless of the case.
I do not wish to "force" standards upon the world. I have a direct interest in the positive quality impacts of standards and when I hire someone and pay them to do work for me, I expect them to deliver what I ask for. If someone is unable to use the shift key as prescribed, they have a choice of looking elsewhere for work. As I have said repeatedly, and I will say again, this is not a value judgement. If you prefer to work with tools that do not require deliberate use of case sensitivity, then more power to you! Great! If your compiler could care less, then that goes for me, too. But I expect the same sort of respect back, and I take offense at the implication that my dependency on case-sensitivity is wrong, and that in someone else's perfect world, I would not be able to call a class "DateControl", and then name a variable that references and instance of it "dateControl". What is elitist?
Sene Bauman: I would also like to remind you that civility and respect are essential to purposeful discourse. As a scientist, I learned a long time ago, disagreement is fine, in fact, welcomed in debate. But intellectual honesty is what determines outcome, not how loud you shout or beat down your opponent.
I have strived to be civil. There are many different levels of respect, and I must be clear that no one in a free society is obligated to respect anything more than another person's right to have and express an opinion. However, no opinion, religious or simply religiously held, demands respect out of mere existence. If people take criticisms of their opinions personally, that is their problem and no else's.
If "disagreement is fine", then I do not understand why "the compiler should ignore [case] and not produce a syntax error".
You imply that my arguments are dishonest without a shred of evidence to back that up. In some countries, that would be considered libelous. Fortunately, mine is not one of them. I have neither shouted, nor have I resorted to "beating down [my] opponent." If making a detailed case to support my point, or citing my opinion on someone else's points is considered beating someone down, then I am guilty as charged.
Finally, I can understand if someone takes issue with my observation that lack of care about capitalization in programming code correlates with the same lack of care in written language. I will leave it up to other readers to ascertain whether my assertion is supported.