Re: [Cppunit-devel] ch-ch-ch-changes ...

[Steve M. R. <ste...@vi...>]

On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 11:04:34AM +0200, Bastiaan Bakker wrote:

> On Tue, May 29, 2001 at 12:03:15PM -0700, Townsend, Guy wrote:

> > > From: Steve M. Robbins
> > > Since there are already CU_-prefixed macros, I'm planning
> > > to use CU_assert unless I hear a better suggestion.  
> > 
> > I already mentioned it, but just to reiterate it here, I ask the question
> > whether macros shoudn't be all caps? 
> 
> It is true that macros have a long history of being all caps.
> 
> I hereby amend my post of yesterday to read "I'm planning to convert
> to CU_ASSERT unless I hear a better suggestion".
> 
> Sofar I've not payed very much attention to the macro prefixes yet, but I
> would like to suggest we go for the slightly longer 'CPPUNIT' prefix:

Ha!  This almost brings me full circle: I had originally used
"CppUnit_assert()" for the macro name.  Since UPPERCASE seems popular
for macros, that would become CPPUNIT_ASSERT, instead.


> It's more in line with the CppUnit namespace we already claim and the header
> guard defines.
> CU may be too short to avoid naming collisions with other libraries,
> especially because of the phonetic 'see you' association.

I agree with what you say.  I had suggested CU_ only because it was
already there.

I'm fine with CPPUNIT as long as it is used everywhere.  Therefore, I
will change CU_* --> CPPUNIT_* everywhere it appears.

-S

-- 
by Rocket to the Moon,
by Airplane to the Rocket,
by Taxi to the Airport,
by Frontdoor to the Taxi,
by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ...
- They Might Be Giants