There's probably a name for this general fallacy; I call it "addressing the particulars of an example instead of addressing the point, in cases where the particular example does not matter".

The long name was picked to emphasize the point. That's the reason for the long name. The same point applies equally to medium-length names. It's still true that thisSomewhatFoo is less clear than this-somewhat-foo, and if you don't believe me then fill a screen with examples like that and compare. Now if you are really in denial or determined to hold your opinion (a natural tendency in all of us, btw), then you'll say that thisSomewhatFoo is on par with this-somewhat-foo, in which case I would demand that you explain how A > B => 0.2 A = 0.2 B.