niedz., 8 mar 2026 o 09:30 Amlal El Mahrouss via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> napisał(a):
Hi Andrzej,
Firstly, Yes indeed I agree to both parts, I should mention that I am not an English native speaker as well.
And secondly, regarding the PR, I agree that dropping extensions_t to extents and thus dropping the suffix _t. I have nothing to add here.
However, I am curious about your "private detail" part of your message, I think we should still keep the name short in most cases, unless it's a container (like basic_extents as you mentioned).
Can you elaborate about that last part?
Sure. I made an assumption that because header multi/detail/extents.hpp has"detail" in its path, it follows the Boost practice and represents an implementation detail (as opposed to a component exposed to the customers). This was reinforced by my seeing "namespace detail" in the header contents. But now, upon closer inspection, I can see that class extents are not in that namespace. And now I am confused. Usually, it is the Reference section that determines what is officialand what is the implementation detail. But this library doesn't have an adequate Reference section. Regards, &rzej;
Best, Amlal _______________________________________________ Boost mailing list -- boost@lists.boost.org To unsubscribe send an email to boost-leave@lists.boost.org https://lists.boost.org/mailman3/lists/boost.lists.boost.org/ Archived at: https://lists.boost.org/archives/list/boost@lists.boost.org/message/GAEGFG6O...