Dear god please no. This way madness lies. Your idea of “whatever you think works best” is not going to line up with whatever the next person that comes along thinks, and your codebase is about to get all kinds of fucked up.
Thinking code complete is going to save you is naive. Even in languages like C and Java, where it works best, you still need to be able to read and understand the code in context. There’s no hope in a language like Ruby with all it’s meta programming stuff
Margaret Elaine Hamilton (née Heafield; born August 17, 1936) is an American computer scientist, systems engineer, and business owner. She was director of the Software Engineering Division of the MIT Instrumentation Laboratory, which developed on-board flight software for NASA’s Apollo program. She later founded two software companies—Higher Order Software in 1976 and Hamilton Technologies in 1986, both in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Hamilton has published more than 130 papers, proceedings, and reports, about sixty projects, and six major programs. She invented the term “software engineering”, stating “I began to use the term ‘software engineering’ to distinguish it from hardware and other kinds of engineering, yet treat each type of engineering as part of the overall systems engineering process.”
On November 22, 2016, Hamilton received the Presidential Medal of Freedom from president Barack Obama for her work leading to the development of on-board flight software for NASA’s Apollo Moon missions.
Huh, didn’t know about her! She sounds like a badass lady!
That S is much older than the 90s btw
Yes and no. I agree that camel vs snake or that stupid mNameThing that was popular for a while, doesn’t reeeeeaaally matter, although I would argue that convention over the language still has value. As an example, naming a Java variable with a capital letter would be confusing and annoying to any new devs joining the project, even if it’s a valid identifier. Also it’s handy to be able to look at something in ALL_CAPS and know that it’s probably a static final, without having to check it’s definition. I guess it’s about finding that line between useful conventions and pedantry.