Boost logo

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)...


------------------------------------------------------------------------ home: - Simplifying group communications

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at