|
Boost : |
From: Sean A Corfield (sean_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-06-01 11:20:59
Nathan Myers <ncm_at_[hidden]> wrote:
[IMHO it would be a mistake for the Boost classes to have identically the same
name as the components proposed for the Standard. The committee will
undoubtedly change the interface in subtle or not-so-subtle ways.]
That's an interesting point.
[In other words, to me it is a Good Thing if Boost names differ from proposed
Standard names by capitalization.]
Against, I would say: Boost stuff will be in a different namespace (from std)
so it won't matter.
However, that's a bit of a thin argument.
OTOH, if our type names differed by case that probably isn't enough: the
committee are most likely to change signatures so it might help further if we
used "mixedCase" for variables and functions and "MixedCase" for types. Then
any multiword variables / functions would be guaranteed different names to
those in any revision of the Standard...
Just a thought (basically, I don't really care as long as we have a single
consistent policy for Boost)...
Sean
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/boost
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk