From: Ed Brey (brey_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-08-18 12:29:04
Email seemed somewhat boring, until Beman Dawes wrote:
>How would such sub-namespace names and the level of granularity be
>chosen? A possible default is to use the header name (without
>extension). That makes it easy to remember the sub-namespace names,
>and usually yields appropriate granularity. Some of the header names
>may be a bit awkward, as in namespace cstdint, but on the whole they
For whatever reason, standard header filenames sometimes are
cryptic (e.g. sstream) while the identifiers contained within tend
to be simple english (e.g. stringstream). I think that the boost
sub-namespace identifiers should always be simple english, and so
suggest we follow the following prioritized rules:
1. If the namespace is at the same scope as the file (i.e. all items in
the file are within the namespace), and the file has a simple english
name, the namespace should use the same name as the file.
2. Otherwise (the namespace scope differs from the file's scope or the
file has a cryptic name (like cstdint)), an appropriate simple english
name will be chosen for the namespace.
A correpsonding (yet-unwritten, AFAIK), boost rule would be to always
use simple english names for header files, unless there is a compelling
reason not to, as in the case of cstdint.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk