Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool2.mu.edu!uunet!stan!imp
From: imp@Solbourne.COM (Warner Losh)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Naming Conventions
Keywords: renaming symbols
Message-ID: <1991Jan25.005440.27042@Solbourne.COM>
Date: 25 Jan 91 00:54:40 GMT
References: <1568@tcs.tcs.com> <62211@brunix.UUCP> <70185@microsoft.UUCP>
Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc., Longmont, CO
Lines: 15

In article <70185@microsoft.UUCP> jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK) writes:
->I agree that a good, simple way to resolve name conflicts is going to
->be necessary.  But, we also need to figure out some way to get to a 
->consensus of a good, standard, base set of C++ libraries for people
->to build on.  [However, I can imagine no way to do this.]


Our X toolkit (OI) prefixes all of the identifiers with either a oi_
or a OI_.  This seems to avoid many of the problems that people have
with 2 libraries defining stuff like Base.

Warner
-- 
Warner Losh		imp@Solbourne.COM
We sing about Beauty and we sing about Truth at $10,000 a show.