Re: [boost] Re: Review: Boost Test Library

From: Kevlin Henney (kevlin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-02-16 12:01:32

In message <96ji2m+ipd2_at_[hidden]>, williamkempf_at_[hidden] writes
>The names are fine, but we still have the question of whether or not 
>we should be using acronyms.  With Boost in the name it's nearly 
>impossible for us to conflict with other library names, but the 
>acronyms are much more likely to collide with other acronyms already 
>in use.  Even if this doesn't pose possible legal problems (does it?) 
>it does make it more likely that the acronym will just confuse 
>readers/users of the libraries.  The only compelling reason to keep 
>them, as David Abrahams points out, is that the titles of the 
>libraries are quite long and cumbersome for use in documentation and 
>conversation.

I was never aware that we had a problem as serious as you make out, and
remain unconvinced that we have. I had only considered the abbreviations
to be a short-hand convenience for the full name rather than a
replacement. In that sense, we should use them in docs as we would any
other abbreviation (AOA), so that when we use AOA it is quite clear from
the context.

Kevlin
____________________________________________________________

  Kevlin Henney                   phone:  [phone]
  Curbralan Limited               mobile: [phone]
  mailto:kevlin_at_[hidden]     fax:    [phone]
  http://www.curbralan.com
____________________________________________________________