From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-07-18 14:04:24
Just to clarify, since many people seem to have missed this point which I
think is spelled out clearly at the very beginning of the document in
THE PROPOSED GUIDELINES ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCEPTANCE
OF A LIBRARY
I don't care whether they're accepted or not, but nearly every vote for
rejection has been accompanied by some concern that libraries will be
rejected based on not having followed the guidelines. I think it would be
less confusing and more appropriate if everyone evaluates the document on
the basis of the statement above.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dean Calver" <deano_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Review: Boost Coding Guidelines
> I vote YES as guidelines in principle, but NO if a library would be
> purely on the basis of not fitting the guidelines.
> For the very big libraries that Boost has 'acquired' several times now,
> requiring a complete change in style and/or interface purely to fit some
> guidelines seems pointless.
> Perhaps (as others have suggested) clearly marking which are REQUIRED
> macro naming) and which are guidelines.
> But overall I think the guidelines will help, both users and writers of
> libraries, so it has to be a good thing.
> Dean Calver,
> Lead Programmer,
> Creature Labs
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <williamkempf_at_[hidden]>
> To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 9:59 PM
> Subject: [boost] Re: Review: Boost Coding Guidelines
> > --- In boost_at_y..., "Mark Rodgers" <mark.rodgers_at_c...> wrote:
> > > I feel we should reject this since I don't feel it is appropriate
> > for
> > > Boost to mandate some of the things in these guidelines. The
> > > implementation of a Boost library is really up to the discretion of
> > > the submitter; if they happen to prefer foo_ to m_foo, then who are
> > > we to argue?
> > >
> > > I realise that this is not the intention of the "guidelines", and
> > > they are merely supposed to be suggestions, but I don't think they
> > > will be seen that way.
> > I feel we should accept the guidelines. The document clearly states
> > that the intent isn't to force a style on submitted libraries.
> > However, having a Boost sanctioned guideline makes the code much
> > easier to read and maintain if a library does follow some consistent
> > style, not only with itself but with other Boost libraries as well.
> > We can't hope to do this, however, unless there's an "official"
> > suggestion for Boost.
> > Further, one goal of the Boost libraries is for them to be considered
> > in future drafts of the standard. It will be much easier on the
> > comittee if any submissions are implemented in a style consistent
> > with the style used by the standard itself. Yes, some of the
> > implementation details such as names of private data members won't
> > mean much to the committee, but the public interface will.
> > Bill Kempf
> > Info: http://www.boost.org Unsubscribe:
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> Info: http://www.boost.org Unsubscribe:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk