Boost logo

Boost :

From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-07-12 19:29:18

At 04:50 PM 7/12/99 -0700, Reid Sweatman wrote:

>> A) .h
>> B) .hpp
>> C) Left up to submitter
>I've never really liked .hpp, but of the choices given, it's the one
>choose, precisely because of the makefile issue. There are other
>that base some judgements on extension, too, like editors (for
>MultiEdit, which I use by preference, although it currently doesn't
>distinguish between C and C++. It could, however, with very little

I am leaning toward .hpp, myself, unless someone comes up with a
killer argument.

By the way, the date for poll to open is Wednesday, the 14th, at
12:00 noon, EDT, and it will close on Friday, the 16th, at 4 PM, EDT.
 The original post said "Friday, the 17". Sigh.

>I was wondering, though, why not follow the STL convention of using
>extension (although I realize that such files are usually merely
>that include a more conventional header).

Better to leave *no* extension to the standards committee, I think.
Too many utility programs (grep, IDE multi-file searches, etc.) work
better if they have an extension to chew on.


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

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