I'm siding with Dave A and the longer names. You can always shorten it in your code with an alias. For me it's a matter of future expansion, and maintenance, we have boost::bind, and boost::lambda::bind, and perhaps soon boost:fcpp::lambda which is the namespace which the function? If we use apprev. 4 everythg, thn, we lose contx. boost::fs =? "FileSystem", "FastSort", "FirstSearch", "FloatingSymbols".... yes these are a bit contrived but you can usually use "using namespace", or a namespace alias safely within a function scope. Then when you leave the company the next poor maintainer of your code has a chance. Also a global search is easier if the letters to be searched for are more or less a unique set. Yours, -Gary- -----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Beman Dawes Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 11:44 AM To: Boost mailing list Subject: Re: [boost] Re: algorithms namespace At 03:28 PM 2/18/2004, Peter Dimov wrote:
I think it's a fuzzy line in the sand, so all I really know is that I do like "ref" and don't like "fs" :)
Yes, is seems that it comes down to personal preference. Dave likes to say filesystem, and you don't like fs...
I never liked either. "filesystem" is too long and sounds affected. "fs" is too short and non-specific. Those names just escaped because nothing better surfaced. Maybe if the LWG likes the library enough to standardize it we can come up with a better name. --Beman _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost