Re: Merge C++ conversion into trunk (4/6 - hash table rewrite)

[Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Lawrence Crowl <crowl@google.com> wrote:
> On 9/28/12, Michael Matz <matz@suse.de> wrote:
>>
>> I would even prefer 'e' over value_type.  It's scoped, the context always
>> will be clear, no need to be verbose in that name.  I find the long names
>> inelegant, as most of the standard libs conventions.
>
> We need some convention.  If we choose a convention different from
> the standard library, then we are essentially saying that we do not
> intend to interoperate with the standard library.  I do not think
> that is the intent of the community, but I could be wrong about that.

I agree.  If there already exists a convention that is widely known
and recognized, then we should use it.  There is negative value in
inventing a new convention.  We need to lower barriers to adoption,
not raise them.

Using the standard library convention seems to me like the best thing
to do here.


Diego.