From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-02-16 13:05:50
At 10:51 AM 2/16/2001 -0500, David Abrahams wrote:
>The only excuse for these acronyms, AFAICT, is that it gets cumbersome to
>refer to a library as "The Boost Foo Library" over and over within the
>library's own documentation. I didn't want an acronym for the Python lib,
>but eventually found it hard to make the docs read easily without one.
>anyone think of a good alternative?
There is a difference between internal use in the docs for a large library,
where it does get cumbersome to use the full name, and externally
(particularly outside of Boost) where BxL acronyms are likely to cause lots
And what happens when some get added to the C++ Standard Library? Gets
even more confusing if we go around talking about the BxL.
So I think it is good that Mark brought it up, even if we don't know all
the answers right away. I've removed BxL references from the Introducing
Boost presentation I'm working on.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk