Subject: Re: [boost] Name of namespace detail
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-10-12 21:43:42
Mateusz Loskot wrote:
> Inspired by Jean-Louis question about what to put to namespace detail, I
> would be interested learning about rationale of name of the namespace
> detail (sometimes details or impl too).
> Recently, I've participated in a very interesting discussion, on ACCU
> members mailing list, about prefixes and suffixes like Base or _base nad
> Impl or _impl, as misused, irrelevant and confusing, meaningless, etc.
> For example, how to properly name elements of PIMPL idiom and similar.
> During the discussion I suggested that 'detail' is a good name for
> namespace dedicated to implementation details being not a part of public
> interface of a component. I got answer that it as the same issues (it's
> meaningless) as Impl etc.
Why? Could you please provide details on what their responses are?
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://spirit.sf.net http://www.facebook.com/djowel Meet me at BoostCon http://www.boostcon.com/home http://www.facebook.com/boostcon
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk