Dave Harris wrote:
In-Reply-To: <d4j89a$cd7$1@sea.gmane.org> gennadiy.rozental@thomson.com (Gennadiy Rozental) wrote (abridged):
BOOST_FOREACH
By the way, is there a rationale for the name? I'd have expected BOOST_FOR_EACH, with a word separator between FOR and EACH because, well they are separate words. This also matches the precedent of std::for_each. Word separators are especially important for names that are all in capitals.
Is there a compelling reason to omit the second underline?
I don't think there's a /compelling/ reason, but here's my thought process: * This isn't an algorithm, so I don't want to evoke std::for_each. * It's like a new keyword, and some other languages have "foreach" as a keyword. Anyway, I'm not married to the name, and I'd gladly change it if people preferred to type an extra underscore. :-) -- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com