Re: [boost] Arguing about names in Boost libraries
Le 25/04/11 15:21, Edward Diener a écrit :
What is wrong with the people commenting on libraries for Boost who are so concerned about the names being used ? We are talking only about C++ identifiers and yet there are now endless discussions where people disagree on names or argue that some name is not what they want or that they like some other name, with a list of names that they find adequate.
This is irrelevant. There is something mentally wrong about all those peoples spending endless amounts of time around this issue. I notice this does not happen nowadays for just one library but for ever single library, or proposed library, which is mentioned on this mailing list.
Is this the way all of you people actually work in your daily jobs, or on your own projects, spending hours and days arguing with others about C++ identifiers for every little thing ? Are you not aware of the absurdity of your endless remarks ?
Grow up ! Surely there are better things to do than carry on endlessly about some name, that is should be x or y or z or some other inane preferable list.
It's time for somebody to say this, so I will do it. A C++ identifier name, as long as it is vaguely about what the functionality entails, is perfectly adequate. It does not have to satisfy everyone in the universe. Period !
Hi, I'm really surprised to read such a post on this forum. Vicente
On 5/6/2015 5:31 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
Le 25/04/11 15:21, Edward Diener a écrit :
What is wrong with the people commenting on libraries for Boost who are so concerned about the names being used ? We are talking only about C++ identifiers and yet there are now endless discussions where people disagree on names or argue that some name is not what they want or that they like some other name, with a list of names that they find adequate.
This is irrelevant. There is something mentally wrong about all those peoples spending endless amounts of time around this issue. I notice this does not happen nowadays for just one library but for ever single library, or proposed library, which is mentioned on this mailing list.
Is this the way all of you people actually work in your daily jobs, or on your own projects, spending hours and days arguing with others about C++ identifiers for every little thing ? Are you not aware of the absurdity of your endless remarks ?
Grow up ! Surely there are better things to do than carry on endlessly about some name, that is should be x or y or z or some other inane preferable list.
It's time for somebody to say this, so I will do it. A C++ identifier name, as long as it is vaguely about what the functionality entails, is perfectly adequate. It does not have to satisfy everyone in the universe. Period !
Hi,
I'm really surprised to read such a post on this forum.
I am really surprised to get a comment now about a post that I made over 4 years ago. Prosecutor: "Tell me exactly what you were doing on April 25, 2011 at 3:21 in the aftrenoon." Witness: "I can barely remember what I was doing an hour ago much less over four years ago." Prosecutor: "Arrest that man. He is obviously an accessory to the crime !"
Le 07/05/15 00:22, Edward Diener a écrit :
On 5/6/2015 5:31 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
Le 25/04/11 15:21, Edward Diener a écrit :
What is wrong with the people commenting on libraries for Boost who are so concerned about the names being used ? We are talking only about C++ identifiers and yet there are now endless discussions where people disagree on names or argue that some name is not what they want or that they like some other name, with a list of names that they find adequate.
This is irrelevant. There is something mentally wrong about all those peoples spending endless amounts of time around this issue. I notice this does not happen nowadays for just one library but for ever single library, or proposed library, which is mentioned on this mailing list.
Is this the way all of you people actually work in your daily jobs, or on your own projects, spending hours and days arguing with others about C++ identifiers for every little thing ? Are you not aware of the absurdity of your endless remarks ?
Grow up ! Surely there are better things to do than carry on endlessly about some name, that is should be x or y or z or some other inane preferable list.
It's time for somebody to say this, so I will do it. A C++ identifier name, as long as it is vaguely about what the functionality entails, is perfectly adequate. It does not have to satisfy everyone in the universe. Period !
Hi,
I'm really surprised to read such a post on this forum.
I am really surprised to get a comment now about a post that I made over 4 years ago.
Prosecutor: "Tell me exactly what you were doing on April 25, 2011 at 3:21 in the aftrenoon."
Witness: "I can barely remember what I was doing an hour ago much less over four years ago."
Prosecutor: "Arrest that man. He is obviously an accessory to the crime !"
I'm really sorry, I ordered the mails and I didn't see the date of the post. Vicente
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba < vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
I'm really sorry, I ordered the mails and I didn't see the date of the post.
For what it's worth, I did enjoy reading the OP :p -- -Matt Calabrese
On 6 May 2015 at 23:31, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
It's time for somebody to say this, so I will do it. A C++ identifier name, as long as it is vaguely about what the functionality entails, is perfectly adequate. It does not have to satisfy everyone in the universe. Period !
I'm really surprised to read such a post on this forum.
Especially as it came from 2011 (http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Arguing-about-names-in-Boost-libra ries-td3473138.html). My email reader does this too sometimes, it magically resurrects an email deleted many years ago. I find it quirky, if slightly worrying that there must be a bug in there. At least deleting email with this old DOS era email program is many thousand times more likely to actually delete email compared to deleting email on gmail. Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
participants (4)
-
Edward Diener -
Matt Calabrese -
Niall Douglas -
Vicente J. Botet Escriba