From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-06 21:13:11
Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
> At 08:06 PM 11/5/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
> >Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
> >> Is consistent naming across platforms important? I would have thought
> >> naming consistent with the platform's usual conventions would be more
> >> important.
> >That is the question. How should we choose one over the other?
> >[repeating info already posted: The usual conventions for Windows
> >don't work for at least some Windows compilers (Cygwin GCC).]
> Well, the first rule is "it has to work", so if Cygwin GCC needs a
> "lib" prefix, it has to get a "lib" prefix. That trumps the "usual
> conventions for the platform" rule.
> Now Cygwin GCC may be enough reason to use the "lib" prefix for all
> Windows compilers. But I don't know any law that says individual
> compilers can't have their own conventions. Let's say Backwards
> Compilers, Inc, ships a Windows compiler that requires "bil" as the
> prefix. We'll have to support both "lib" and "bil".
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk