On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Lawrence Crowl <cr...@google.com> wrote: > On 9/28/12, Michael Matz <m...@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.
