Markus Werle said:
Beman Dawes wrote:
Use the naming conventions of the C++ Standard Library (See Naming conventions rationale):
* Names (except as noted below) should be all lowercase, with words separated by underscores. * Acronyms should be treated as ordinary names (e.g. xml_parser instead of XML_parser). * Template parameter names begin with an uppercase letter. * Macro (gasp!) names all uppercase and begin with BOOST_.
A hard burden You lay on developers.
It's not a burden.
So maybe the code has to be piped through a code de-beautifier when it comes to a boostification.
That's a bit harsh. If *you* don't care for the style, you're welcome to that opinion, but voicing it in this manner isn't going to help anyone to agree with you.
IMHO (UsingThisConventionHere == CommonPracticeElsewhere)
It's not common practice everywhere (I know of as many places that follow the C++ standard naming conventions as those that follow what I'll call "Java" naming conventions). But the important thing is that the whole point of Boost is to be a test bed and development area for libraries that *might* be considered for inclusion in the standard. As such, we have to follow the standard naming conventions. -- William E. Kempf