From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-24 17:07:02
"Paul A Bristow" <boost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> Consistency IS valuable though - it is irritating to try to remember if
> a _ is needed or not - and I usually don't - leading to a blizzard of
> warning messages from the oligo-neuronic compiler.
> So I feel you should either go for always using multi_, or never. And
> since STL already uses multimap, you should ignore my hyper-sensibility
> about "multiindex" in names (and that would make it odd in the text).
The standard may have made a mistake. It's fairly easy to swallow
"multixxx" but when there are more x's it gets much harder.
-- 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