From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-17 18:51:33
Andreas Huber <ah2003_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams <dave <at> boost-consulting.com> writes:
>> "Andreas Huber" <ah2003 <at> gmx.net> writes:
>> > That would be one possibility. However I think the double colon still
>> > hints too much in the direction that there is a namespace called
>> > Boost::Thread. Boosters of course know that namespace identifiers are
>> > lowercase, but an outsider maybe doesn't. Since we can't consistently
>> > name libs after the namespace they're residing in I now totally agree
>> > with Dave that we should choose a naming convention that has obviously
>> > nothing to do with C++ identifiers whatsoever. Plus, Dave's convention
>> > has the advantage that only very few people need to change the names
>> > in the docs/books, etc.
>>
>> Does that change your vote?
>
> I guess you ask because of the word "totally". Sorry, not *that* totally ;-).
> When I wrote "Dave's convention" I meant the one with captitalized names and
> one dot between the names (Boost.Python) as opposed to the one I preferred
> (boost::python). This has nothing to do with the vote.
Thanks for clarifying.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com