From: Andrey Semashev (andysem_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-23 15:28:12
David Abrahams wrote:
> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> Andrey Semashev wrote:
>>> So, there was a really interesting and hot discussion about namings.
>>> Many opinions were expressed and I'd like to make some roundup.
>> I still think that the question "should X be included at all" is
>> slightly more fundamental than "should X be named rearm, protect, or
>> on". But this may be just me.
> It's not _just_ you. I definitely agree. Why hasn't Peter's question
> been addressed?
I guess I've missed it somewhere in the thread. I have given the example in
the post nearby.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk