Boost logo

Boost :

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
>aren't bad.

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, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at