The only excuse for these acronyms, AFAICT, is that it gets cumbersome to
refer to a library as The Boost Foo Library over and over within the
library's own documentation. I didn't want an acronym for the Python lib,
but eventually found it hard to make the docs read easily without one. Can
anyone think of a good alternative?

-Dave

----- Original Message -----
From: <williamkempf@[...]..> 
To: <boost@[...].com> 
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 10:19 AM
Subject: [boost] Re: Review: Boost Test Library


>  --- In boost@[...].. , Mark Rodgers <mark.rodgers@[...]..> wrote:
>  > From: <williamkempf@[...]..>
>  > --- In boost@[...].. , Jens Maurer <Jens.Maurer@[...]..> wrote:
>  > > > The review for Beman Dawes' proposal of a Boost Test Library...
>  > >
>  > > I'm going to be using the test_lib stuff during my final
>  polishing
>  > > of the BTL...
>  >
>  > So does T stand for Test or Thread? Looks like Test will be first.
>  > But surely T should have been reserved for Template. :-)
>  >
>  > Can we please stop this trend of calling all our libraries BxL?
>  > I am ever so easily confused.
> 
>  The Boost Thread Library was the first to be called the BTL,
>  regardless of the chronology of acceptance ;).
> 
>  Seriously, though, someone else coined the acronym, not myself. I'm
>  not married to any name or acronym at this point, though there will
>  be a lot of documentation to change if we go by a different
>  name/acronym at this point, and it's just going to get worse. So...
>  if anyone has a different name, or thinks that we should stick with
>  Boost Thread Library but not use the acronym BTL, speak up now so I
>  can proactively avoid work in the future :).
> 
>  Bill Kempf
> 
> 
> 
>