Subject: Re: [boost] Arguing about names in Boost libraries
From: Nevin Liber (nevin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-04-25 11:53:58
On 25 April 2011 08:21, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> What is wrong with the people commenting on libraries for Boost who are so
> concerned about the names being used ?
I've been around long enough to learn that names are incredibly important.
It is how we communicate.
> This is irrelevant. There is something mentally wrong about all those
> peoples spending endless amounts of time around this issue. I notice this
> does not happen nowadays for just one library but for ever single library,
> or proposed library, which is mentioned on this mailing list.
Because some of us do generic programming, commonality of names have become
even more important.
> Is this the way all of you people actually work in your daily jobs, or on
> your own projects, spending hours and days arguing with others about C++
> identifiers for every little thing ?
For me, it is a function of how easily I can change it in the future if I
get it wrong. The bigger the scope, the more up front effort I put into the
Grow up ! Surely there are better things to do than carry on endlessly about
> some name, that is should be x or y or z or some other inane preferable
If it bothers you so much, why not just skip reading those messages? Boost
is a volunteer effort; people can spend that effort any way they see fit.
> It's time for somebody to say this, so I will do it. A C++ identifier name,
> as long as it is vaguely about what the functionality entails, is perfectly
In your opinion. Some of us have other opinions, cultivated from our
> It does not have to satisfy everyone in the universe. Period !
It won't satisfy everyone. But we still should strive for the best names
-- Nevin ":-)" Liber <mailto:nevin_at_[hidden]> (847) 691-1404
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk