From: Dave Harris (brangdon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-03 04:49:35
gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden] (Gennadiy Rozental) wrote (abridged):
By the way, is there a rationale for the name? I'd have expected
BOOST_FOR_EACH, with a word separator between FOR and EACH because, well
they are separate words. This also matches the precedent of std::for_each.
Word separators are especially important for names that are all in
Is there a compelling reason to omit the second underline?
-- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk