Refering to Boost.Build in print
Hi, In the months leading up to the publication of Dave's and Aleksey's TMP book, there was a discussion of the proper form for referring to Boost libraries in published material. I'm writing about Boost.Build, and I'm planning to refer to it as Boost.Build most of the time. My question is: if I refer to Boost.Build as "the Boost build system," is this a proper name or a description? How should it be capitalized? Jonathan
"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> writes:
Hi,
In the months leading up to the publication of Dave's and Aleksey's TMP book, there was a discussion of the proper form for referring to Boost libraries in published material.
I'm writing about Boost.Build, and I'm planning to refer to it as Boost.Build most of the time. My question is: if I refer to Boost.Build as "the Boost build system," is this a proper name or a description? How should it be capitalized?
I guess the most consistent thing would be to capitalize "Build" and leave the rest as you have written it. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> writes:
Hi,
In the months leading up to the publication of Dave's and Aleksey's TMP book, there was a discussion of the proper form for referring to Boost libraries in published material.
I'm writing about Boost.Build, and I'm planning to refer to it as Boost.Build most of the time. My question is: if I refer to Boost.Build as "the Boost build system," is this a proper name or a description? How should it be capitalized?
I guess the most consistent thing would be to capitalize "Build" and leave the rest as you have written it.
Really? To me it seems a bit odd to treat the works "build" and "system" differently, when they are both components on the term "build system." My instinct would have been to use either "Boost Build System" or "Boost build system." When you mention consistency, do you mean consistency with the usage "Boost Xxxx library," in which "Boost" and the library name are capitalized but the word "library" isn't? To me the parallel doesn't seem very strong. At any rate, I don't have a strong preference, and I'm happy to use whatever you think is best. Jonathan
"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> writes:
Hi,
In the months leading up to the publication of Dave's and Aleksey's TMP book, there was a discussion of the proper form for referring to Boost libraries in published material.
I'm writing about Boost.Build, and I'm planning to refer to it as Boost.Build most of the time. My question is: if I refer to Boost.Build as "the Boost build system," is this a proper name or a description? How should it be capitalized?
I guess the most consistent thing would be to capitalize "Build" and leave the rest as you have written it.
Really? To me it seems a bit odd to treat the works "build" and "system" differently, when they are both components on the term "build system."
The standard for libraries is, e.g. "the Boost Bind library."
My instinct would have been to use either "Boost Build System" or "Boost build system."
When you mention consistency, do you mean consistency with the usage "Boost Xxxx library," in which "Boost" and the library name are capitalized but the word "library" isn't? To me the parallel doesn't seem very strong.
No, not very strong, but it's more consistent. Once you start calling the system "Boost.Build," the connection between "build" and "system" becomes a lot weaker and "Boost Build system" seems to make more sense.
At any rate, I don't have a strong preference, and I'm happy to use whatever you think is best.
I don't have a strong preference either; the convention I cited is the only one I can come up with rationale for. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
"Jonathan Turkanis"writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
"Jonathan Turkanis" writes:
if I refer to Boost.Build as "the Boost build system," is this a proper name or a description? How should it be capitalized?
I guess the most consistent thing would be to capitalize "Build" and leave the rest as you have written it.
Really? To me it seems a bit odd to treat the works "build" and "system" differently, when they are both components on the term "build system."
The standard for libraries is, e.g. "the Boost Bind library."
I know -- but "bind library" is not a common, generic term.
My instinct would have been to use either "Boost Build System" or "Boost build system."
When you mention consistency, do you mean consistency with the usage "Boost Xxxx library," in which "Boost" and the library name are capitalized but the word "library" isn't? To me the parallel doesn't seem very strong.
No, not very strong, but it's more consistent. Once you start calling the system "Boost.Build," the connection between "build" and "system" becomes a lot weaker
How? "Boost.Build" and "the Boost build system" still have different internal structure, despite the fact that they contain "Boost" and "build" at consecutive positions.
and "Boost Build system" seems to make more sense.
At any rate, I don't have a strong preference, and I'm happy to use whatever you think is best.
I don't have a strong preference either; the convention I cited is the only one I can come up with rationale for.
My rational is simple: in "Boost build system," Boost is an adjective (a proper one) and "build system" is a noun modified by the adjective. Capitalizing "Boost" and "build" but not "system" obscures the structure. But, again, I don't have a strong preference. Jonathan
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
I don't have a strong preference either; the convention I cited is the only one I can come up with rationale for.
My rational is simple: in "Boost build system," Boost is an adjective (a proper one) and "build system" is a noun modified by the adjective. Capitalizing "Boost" and "build" but not "system" obscures the structure.
I think "Boost.Build" is a name of software product. OTOH, "Boost build system" means "a build system used by Boost", and says nothing specific about that build system at all. So, just pick the semantics you want to convey in each specific case. - Volodya
Vladimir Prus wrote:
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
I don't have a strong preference either; the convention I cited is the only one I can come up with rationale for.
My rational is simple: in "Boost build system," Boost is an adjective (a proper one) and "build system" is a noun modified by the adjective. Capitalizing "Boost" and "build" but not "system" obscures the structure.
I think "Boost.Build" is a name of software product. OTOH, "Boost build system" means "a build system used by Boost", and says nothing specific about that build system at all. So, just pick the semantics you want to convey in each specific case.
This sounds right to me. But there was a third choice: the Boost Build System. My current impression, from the various comments so far, is that this term doesn't properly name anything: the correct proper name is Boost.Build. Is that right? Jonathan
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
Vladimir Prus wrote:
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
I don't have a strong preference either; the convention I cited is the only one I can come up with rationale for.
My rational is simple: in "Boost build system," Boost is an adjective (a proper one) and "build system" is a noun modified by the adjective. Capitalizing "Boost" and "build" but not "system" obscures the structure.
I think "Boost.Build" is a name of software product. OTOH, "Boost build system" means "a build system used by Boost", and says nothing specific about that build system at all. So, just pick the semantics you want to convey in each specific case.
This sounds right to me.
But there was a third choice: the Boost Build System. My current impression, from the various comments so far, is that this term doesn't properly name anything: the correct proper name is Boost.Build. Is that right?
Yea, the "brand name" is Boost.Build, as far as I'm concerned. - Volodya
From: Vladimir Prus <ghost@cs.msu.su>
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
Vladimir Prus wrote:
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
My rational is simple: in "Boost build system," Boost is an adjective (a proper one) and "build system" is a noun modified by the adjective. Capitalizing "Boost" and "build" but not "system" obscures the structure.
I think "Boost.Build" is a name of software product. OTOH, "Boost build system" means "a build system used by Boost", and says nothing specific about that build system at all. So, just pick the semantics you want to convey in each specific case.
This sounds right to me.
But there was a third choice: the Boost Build System. My current impression, from the various comments so far, is that this term doesn't properly name anything: the correct proper name is Boost.Build. Is that right?
Yea, the "brand name" is Boost.Build, as far as I'm concerned.
I'll weigh in, too. Dave's position that "Boost.Build" is to "the Boost Build" system as "Boost.Bind" is to "the Boost Bind library" is compelling. "Boost Build System" is akin to "Boost Bind Library." I'll grant that we don't have many "systems" in Boost (installation system? documentation system?), but leaving room for the future argues for keeping "system" lower case. I suggest using "Boost.Build" and "the Boost Build system." -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;
Rob Stewart wrote:
From: Vladimir Prus <ghost@cs.msu.su>
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
Vladimir Prus wrote:
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
My rational is simple: in "Boost build system," Boost is an adjective (a proper one) and "build system" is a noun modified by the adjective. Capitalizing "Boost" and "build" but not "system" obscures the structure.
I think "Boost.Build" is a name of software product. OTOH, "Boost build system" means "a build system used by Boost", and says nothing specific about that build system at all. So, just pick the semantics you want to convey in each specific case.
This sounds right to me.
But there was a third choice: the Boost Build System. My current impression, from the various comments so far, is that this term doesn't properly name anything: the correct proper name is Boost.Build. Is that right?
Yea, the "brand name" is Boost.Build, as far as I'm concerned.
I'll weigh in, too. Dave's position that "Boost.Build" is to "the Boost Build" system as "Boost.Bind" is to "the Boost Bind library" is compelling.
I still don't see it, but I've stopped worrying about it.
"Boost Build System" is akin to "Boost Bind Library."
That's just stating a conclusion.
I'll grant that we don't have many "systems" in Boost (installation system? documentation system?), but leaving room for the future argues for keeping "system" lower case.
Boost.Build is a "system" only because it's a "build system," and build systems are (apparently) systems.
I suggest using "Boost.Build" and "the Boost Build system."
I'm going to avoid the issue by using "Boost.Build." Jonathan
"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> writes:
I don't have a strong preference either; the convention I cited is the only one I can come up with rationale for.
My rational is simple: in "Boost build system," Boost is an adjective (a proper one) and "build system" is a noun modified by the adjective. Capitalizing "Boost" and "build" but not "system" obscures the structure.
But, again, I don't have a strong preference.
I have so little preference that I'm done making arguments about it :) -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> writes:
I don't have a strong preference either; the convention I cited is the only one I can come up with rationale for.
My rational is simple: in "Boost build system," Boost is an adjective (a proper one) and "build system" is a noun modified by the adjective. Capitalizing "Boost" and "build" but not "system" obscures the structure.
But, again, I don't have a strong preference.
I have so little preference that I'm done making arguments about it :)
Okay, you beat me to it. ;-) Jonathan
participants (4)
-
David Abrahams -
Jonathan Turkanis -
Rob Stewart -
Vladimir Prus