I've also seen procedural macros that use double-underscores, essentially treating the double underscore as reserved for code generation, but that's really just working around poor support for hygiene in the procedural macro API.
In any case, using double-underscore in normal code is never normal, and using underscores in enum variants isn't normal at all. But in any case, if bstr can get away with nonstandard style, then so can you.
What would be the actual words for BlahBlah and Detail? For me enum variant names should be short and clear description what this variant means, and lines long detailed description should be placed on the tripple-slash doc comment.
@notriddle: Sorry for the confusion, the question should have been better written. It's not "camel case vs double underscore" that I'm asking -- it's "camel case vs underscore" at all that I'm asking. If above, instead of double underscore I was just using a single underscore, would you still have reservations ?
Imagine you are implementing a command interface. So you have some object that the user can issue many different commands to. Depending on the state of the object, some commands work, some commands fail. Thus, there are lots of functions of type