[boost] Re: Dot in Boost Library Names?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-15 20:18:32

Rob Stewart <stewart_at_[hidden]> writes:

> At the risk of discussing the bicycle shed, what about using the
> scope resolution operator?  That, at least, would not be
> misconstrued by a copyeditor and would be in keeping with C++
> syntax.

IMO it's very important to distinguish those things that are supposed
to have meaning in code from those that are not.  Using strongly
C++-like syntax here would be confusing, since these things are not
identifiers.

> Should that be rejected soundly, here's my vote on the period:
>
>                        Never: -1
> Always Except Before Library: 0
>                       Always: 1
>
> -- 
> Rob Stewart                           stewart_at_[hidden]
> Software Engineer                     http://www.sig.com
> Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com