>>But when I look at the future and ask myself: have naming conventions a future, given all the avialable technology ? I don't think so. I see no point in teaching naming conventions to new developers (unless they will maintain a lot of code containing this). For a lot of us it seems to be too late: we carry the past with us.
>
>You and I differ here in an unreconcilable fashion; naming conventions provide useful information an an easily interpretable and consistent fashion. This makes the next guy's job that much easier, as well as my own. Using naming conventions doesn't change the requirment for meaningful names, and you can construct meaningful names with or without conventions and standards. It's much easier to walk in cold if there are standards, even if they differ from what you normally use.

Not using Naming conventions actually is a standard (and not only used by me). And your right, if you document your standard it is of help. There is no doubt there is. Not using naming conventions in my standard seems my preferable way. It seems we can stop here by agreeing to disagree.

Walter,