To camelcase or under-score

IEEE International Conference on Program Comprehension

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 158-167

  Binkley, Dave ^a   Davis, Marcia ^b   Lawrie, Dawn ^a   Morrell, Christopher ^a  

^a LOYOLA UNIVERSITY MARYLAND   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CODE READABILITY; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; MULTI-WORD IDENTIFIERS; NATURAL LANGUAGES; PROGRAM COMPREHENSION;

EID: 70349980457     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/ICPC.2009.5090039     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. D. Sjøberg, J. Hannay, O. Hansen, V. Kampenes, A. Karahasanovic, N. Liborg, and A. Rekdal. A survey of controlled experiments in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 19(4), 1993.
2. C. Boogerd and L. Moonen. Assessing the value of coding standards: An empirical study. In International Conference on Software Maintenance, Beijing, China, September 2008.
3. B. Caprile and P. Tonella. Restructuring program identifier names. In ICSM, 2000.
4. F. Deißenböck and M. Pizka. Concise and consistent naming. In Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Program Comprehension (IWPC 2005), St. Louis, MO, USA, May 2005.
5. E. Dijkstra. Go to statement considered harmful. Communications of the ACM, 11(3), 1968.
6. J. Epelboim, J. Booth, R. Ashkenazy, and A. Taleghani R. steinmans. Fillers and spaces in text: The importance of word recognition during reading. Vision Research, 37(20), 1997.
7. L. Hatton. Safer language subsets: an overview and a case history, misra c. Information & Software Technology, 46(7), 2004.
8. E. Høst and B. Østvold. The programmer's lexicon, volume i: The verbs. In International Working Conference on Source Code Analysis and Manipulation, Beijing, China, September 2008.
9. B. Liblit, A. Begel, and E. Sweetser. Cognitive perspectives on the role of naming in computer programs. In 8th Annual Psychology of Programming Workshop, Brighton, UK, September 2006.
10. th Psychology of Programmers Interest Group Annual Workshop (PPIG 12), pages 171-180, January 01 2000.
11. Sun Microsystems. Code conventions for the java programming language, April 1999.
12. Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA). Guidelines for the use of the c language in critical systems, October 2004.
13. G. Molenberghs and G. Verbeke G. Models for Discrete Longitudinal Data. Springer, Berlin, 2006.
14. C. Morrell, J. Pearson, and L. Brant. Linear transformation of linear mixed effects models. The American Statistician, 51, 1997.
15. B. New, L. Ferrand, C. Pallier, and M. Brysbaert. Reexamining the word length effect in visual word recognition: New evidence from the English Lexicon Project. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(1), 2006.
16. Lyle Ramshaw. Eliminating goto's while preserving program structure. Journal of the ACM, 35(4):893-920, 1988.
17. Samuel T. Redwine, Jr. and William E. Riddle. Software technology maturation. In Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Software Engineering, pages 189-200, London, UK, 28-30 August 1985. IEEE.
18. F. Rubin. 'goto considered harmful' considered harmful. Communications of the ACM, 30(3), 1987.
19. Charles Simonyi. Hungarian notation, November 1999. msdn.microsoft.com/ en-us/library/aa260976(VS.60).aspx.
20. G. Verbeke and G. Molenberghs. Linear mixed models for longitudinal data. Springer-Verlag, New York, second edition, 2001.
21. M. Zelkowitz, D. Wallace, and D. Binkley. Experimental validation of new software technology, chapter 12. SE Empirical Validation (Natalia Juristo and Ana Moreno eds.). Molex, 2003.