Re: [boost] Question about leading underscores

From: Greg Colvin (gcolvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-22 18:54:43

From: Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
> At 06:40 PM 6/22/2001, Greg Colvin wrote:
> 
>  >The safe rule is not to use leading underscores, although I
>  >think those above are technically OK, if useless.
> 
> Why?  Lots of programmers (me included) use a single leading underscore in 
> private member names.  It never causes any problems, and is completely 
> standard conforming.

So long as you remember not to follow the underscore with
a capital letter.

Also, some shops use a leading underscore for unavoidable
variables in statement macros that might interfere with
other names.  I know, don't use macros ...

> That choice was based in an experiment some years ago trying several 
> candidates (including none, trailing underscore, and some others I can't 
> remember.)   Leading underscore won.

OK.  I still dislike such warts.  But I've quoted the
standard so people can choose accordingly.

> --Beman
> 
>  >17.4.3.1.2  Global names                            [lib.global.names]
>  >
>  >1 Certain sets of names and function signatures are always  reserved  to
>  >  the implementation:
>  >
>  >  --Each  name  that  contains a double underscore __) or begins with an
>  >    underscore followed by an uppercase letter (_lex.key_)  is  reserved
>  >    to the implementation for any use.
>  >
>  >  --Each  name  that begins with an underscore is reserved to the imple-
>  >    mentation for use as a name in the global namespace.22)
>  >
>  >  _________________________
>  >  22)  Such  names  are  also  reserved  in  namespace  ::std  (_lib.re-
>  >  served.names_).
> 
> 
> Info: http://www.boost.org  Unsubscribe: <mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
>