Subject: Re: [boost] static in_class constants
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-15 12:02:05
Christian Henning wrote:
> Hi Mateusz,
>> I have question of different nature, why the names are prefixed
>> with underscore? Does it denote they are private, as implementation
>> detail, shouldn't be used as part of public interface, any other
> It's my coding style to have members ( public, protected, private )
> marked with an underscore. I believe it enhances readability. But
> that might be just me.
OK, that's what I was asking about.
I just wanted to learn how to interpret these names.
I don't comment them if I like or not as this belongs to coding
style which is a subjective matter :-)
However, I'd be careful with underscore prefix, in general, regarding to
C++/22.214.171.124.2. I noticed that inclusion guards in IO 2use reserved
names startign with underscore followed by uppercase.
-- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk