A Quick Poll

[etherial]

[Poll #1129374]

Comments

Underscores may be easier to read, but...

[anitra.livejournal.com]

I still use CamelCase. It's easier to type than using lots of underscores.

[nyren.livejournal.com]

MY.WORKPLACE.USES.dots.and.capitalization

[aleksandyr.livejournal.com]

thisIsCamelCase, ThisIsPascalCase. :)

I alternate between them: in most languages, I use PascalCase to handle classes/methods and then camelCase for parameters/variables.

Underscores and CAPITAL_LETTERS are what I use for constants.

[(Anonymous)]

I prefer underscores_all_lowercase, although I do use BumpyCase for the names of classes.

[stillking.livejournal.com]

this is pretty much generational -- the old C programmers like lower_case_syntax, whereas newer C++/Java/Hungarian folks preferItThisWay OrEvenThisWay. i happen to belong to the former camp.

-- sven

[neuromancerzss.livejournal.com]

Readability is not the only measure of a naming convention, though it does seem like your point was actually specifically about readability.

[londo.livejournal.com]

I used to use camelCase, but sometime in the past couple years switched to with_underscores without any observable stimulus.

[juldea.livejournal.com]

Underscores are easier to read, but I admit they're painful to look at and type.