From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-02 12:13:20
At 09:31 PM 2/29/2004, Jeff Garland wrote:
>> This would be a simple search/replace, so I don't mind. Can we all
>> agree on boost::min_? I don't want to have to change it again.
>No, I don't think it is worth changing again. min_ isn't better than
>std_min in my view. Put extra comments in the code / docs to explain
>it. Changing it again means all of us will have to re-integrate your
>new changes. It's working, don't mess with it, lets move on.
I agree with Jeff, both that std_min seems better than min_, and that we
should just move on.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk