From: Joel de Guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-06 22:21:05
E. Gladyshev <egladysh_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> --- Brock Peabody <brock.peabody_at_[hidden]>
>> It stands for 'standard'. Maybe that's a little
>> pretentious for us at
>> this early stage :) gtl would probably be better.
>> I suspect that if we
>> get to a review some people may request something
>> more verbose.
> Since GTL is already taken, how about GTF (GUI
> Template Framework)?
Can't we be more imaginative than that? Aren't we all
already saturated with acronyms and acronyms and yet more
acronyms? There is no policy anyway that forces us to use
acronyms in boost.
When Spirit was being reviewed, I was a bit afraid that someone
would come out and suggest that it be named as BPL. Akkk!
Fortunately, no one did. And after all, BPL already stands for
boost python library.
In the world of computers, it is already a sea of acronyms.
IMO, acronyms are ugly! This is my opinion of course. I
am entitled to my own opinion right? :-)
-- Joel de Guzman joel at boost-consulting.com http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk