23 Sep
2005
23 Sep
'05
7:46 p.m.
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
Andrey Semashev wrote:
So, there was a really interesting and hot discussion about namings. Many opinions were expressed and I'd like to make some roundup.
I still think that the question "should X be included at all" is slightly more fundamental than "should X be named rearm, protect, or on". But this may be just me.
It's not _just_ you. I definitely agree. Why hasn't Peter's question been addressed? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com