Re: Naming convention for variable holding an eventual reference

Karp, Alan H wrote:
> David Wagner wrote:
>> This variant doesn't provide a naming convention on the variables
>> themselves, only a special syntax at the place where those variables
>> are used -- just like your proposal.  The only advantage of this
>> variant over your proposal is that this variant avoids the inversion.
>>
> I don't have any problem with the inversion.  Programmers are used to seeing code evaluated from the innermost nested parens out.

Yes, method chaining is an object-centric viewpoint. 
Functional/procedural code always looks like that.

Sandro