I do not get it - what kind of "win" is it? For example, I know that PHP functions are case-insensitive, but we got to the point where we run linters to check if we used the same case as in declaration. Why not simply bake it in the compiler, especially when you HAVE a compiler?
Perhaps it's a reaction to the state of affairs in C++.
In Java and C# there are pretty widely adhered to coding standards. It's quite hard to find libraries that don't have consistent public APIs with these standards, and those that differ are usually subject to rumblings on their mailing lists and issue trackers.
In C++ there is no agreed upon standard. The standard library uses lower_train_case for all (public) types/members, and much 3rd party library code uses PascalCase and camelCase. The C++ standard library has fewer features than the Java/C#/Python standard libraries, and so you end up bringing more 3rd party code into non-trivial projects (in my experience).
If this feature existed in C++, a codebase could be much more internally consistent. However I'm still not sure I'd like this feature to be available. Certainly it's not possible to add it after-the-fact due to potential conflicts between members that differed by case.
I have a vague theory that the design of most programming languages can be understood as a reaction to the pain their designers experienced in their previous language. So, Java is largely C++ without the things that were painful in C++ (manual memory management, multiple inheritance, operator overloading). Nim's unusual handling of compound names is a reaction to something else that was painful in C++.
Hopefully they'll add a Smalltalk/Objective C style format one day.
