[boost] Re: Dot in Boost Library Names?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-16 14:16:52

Rob Stewart <stewart_at_[hidden]> writes:

> From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
>> 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.
>
> Isn't that an argument against using the dot, too?  

Yes.  Set in roman type and with caps on the library name it is less
confusable and more like a Boost-trademark typographical convention,
but yes it's still confusable.

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