Re: CamelCase For Procedures Names

From: Andy Klock <>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 21:11:09 -0400
Message-ID: <>

The most important thing is consistency by a defined coding standard that everyone must follow. I don't even think it's because it makes the code more readable (though it does) but more because it saves so much time not having to think about what and how to call stuff. Developers should spend more time on the actual logic than whether or not to use CamelCaseWhichIsAnnoyingAsHellWithLongNames or easy_to_read_names.

An old friend and colleague (who I know is a lurker here:) turned our old team onto a document very much like this:

Make amendments to fit your taste. For me it made all the difference in the world.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> On Behalf Of Jeff Chirco
> Sent: Friday, May 18, 2012 5:39 PM
> To: oracle Freelists
> Subject: CamelCase For Procedures Names
> I am settling a debate about allowing CamelCase procedure names within a
> package.

Received on Fri May 18 2012 - 20:11:09 CDT

Original text of this message