>> > I use CamelCase > We should probably have some consensus on function names and > attribute names I would go with: > > get/set ( Daniel's convention): > protected: > int x_; > public: > int x() const {return x;} imp mostly uses get_x() sort of names so far (there are a couple of exceptions).
> void set_x(int x) { x_=x;} > > and thus all class attributes should be name_ as well ( just to > stay consistent) > > and for other functions I would use CamelCase as well Currently all classes are CamelCase and all functions_use_underscores. I like having the distinction as C++ can be ambiguous about what is a function and what is an object (in fact, for certain syntax it is undefined whether you are talking about a class or a function).
> > 5. using namespace > > are we ok with using namespace std for the IMP classes ?? Within a method is fine. Polluting someone else's code or the imp namespace, not so much :-)