From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-16 16:32:28
Andreas Huber wrote:
> Plus, Dave's convention
> has the advantage that only very few people need to change the names in
> the docs/books, etc. Personally, I would have preferred boost::fsm a lot
> over Boost.FSM but it's not *that* important, is it?
The convention I use is that when talking about the entire library, go
with Boost.LibraryName, and when talking about a specific component,
use boost::component_name. That's because there's times when I want to
talk about boost::bind() in particular, disregarding the other elements
in the Boost.Bind library, and Boost libraries often contain a type that
has the same name as the library, but also other types that one might
want to talk about individually.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk