<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 8/5/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Perry R Cook</b> <<a href="mailto:prc@cs.princeton.edu">prc@cs.princeton.edu</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Classes from STK (The Synthesis ToolKit in C++) obey<br>the original caps convention. New classes that are<br>unique to ChucK area all lower case.</blockquote><div><br><br>Yes, I realised this, in fact it's nice to recognise bits from the book as ChucK ugens. However, for normal ChucK use there isn't that much difference between the two and where to cap and where not to seems fairly arbitrary from that perspective.
<br></div><br></div>Maybe it's just me being dyslexic again but every time the compiler complains I go "now what's wrong?" and have to remember this. To me it would seem sensible that if you go "TwoPole" then you also go "SawOsc". If I'm the only one who thinks this is odd/ confusing then I'll happily try to remember what bit comes from where but personally I'm in favour of languages being consistend and having as few exceptions as possible; natural languages are confusing enough as it is already.
<br><br>Just my perspective; nothing more.<br><br>Kas.<br>