Don’t look at rust code
Why? It’s fine?
It IS fine, I though the comic was referring snake_case as disgusting. I was uncomfortable too at first but I got used to it
I’ve found whenever people complain about rust code they can only point out how it’s different but not why it’s worse and I can usually point to a reason why it’s better.
to be fair, I get sometimes it’s difficult to pinpoint why something is bad and even “being different” can be a legitimate criticism on its own
People who learnt structural OOP without actually understanding typing system and their benefits really struggle with learning Rist as they try to map classes onto structs and it just doesn’t work.
Traits are not inheritance.
Boxis not polymorphism. Rust is not C++ with more keywords.
I don’t get it
Classes often have camelCase or PascalCase. Snake cases often are for variables or functions.
I don’t remember the java standards, but it’s enough to get it
The Java standard is ClassName, variableName, FINAL_VALUE_NAME.
It’s derived from a popular C++ standard. (But C++ has many for you to pick.)
Python is the one that likes snake_case, but it’s for variables, as you said. Classes are still PascalCase.
Rust is like Python, but actually tell you the rules instead of you doing whatever you want
When you’re telling a joke to a bunch of computer programmer nerds, you got to tell them what programming language the joke is in, or else it just falls flat.
In college and workplace, all java projects I ever worked with used camelCase. Whether that’s the official stance of Java or not, I don’t recall.
I work on a proprietary language that translates everything to uppercase before compiling. So having a specific case is useless. The standard functions all have wacky cases. Some from the same module may use CamelCase, while it’s brother use snake_case.
… I just use Rust’s style. Simple, easy.
