Difference/relation to Revive's var-naming check?

[scop]

On the surface, this linter seems to be doing a subset of what Revive's var-naming check/rule does, but with less configurability and some problems which don't exist in Revive, like #9.

In what kind of scenarios would you recommend using this linter instead?

[sivchari]

Hi, @scop .
nosnakecase checks all naming contained underscore in Go code. There are a few cases that Go indicates to use underscore.
And, this is how it is written in the Effective Go.

MixedCaps
Finally, the convention in Go is to use MixedCaps or mixedCaps rather than underscores to write multiword names.

So, I recommend this linter that someone wanna
follow the naming rule Go recommends.

p.s. I'll fix #9 as soon as possible.

[scop]

Thanks.

Revive's var-naming checks for underscores, too: https://github.com/mgechev/revive/blob/0f4df1ca407c49d4a89e6eef07440d7af5c6d267/rule/var-naming.go#L120 (as well as other things related to Effective Go guidelines).

Do you know of a specific case involving underscores that revive would not catch, but this linter would?

[scop]

(Despite the name, revive's var-naming is not limited to checking variable names, it checks them on other things as well such as at least consts, package, and function names.)

[favonia]

One difference is that this tool rejects _name while revive accepts it. However, I am with revive here and feel this tool should accept it as well. In general, revive gave me the impression that its checking is more refined and tuned. So, I would also like to see a bad case that revive does not report but this tool does.