Cpp sounds fine to me. That's the only file extension accepted by gnu make
(even the expected tool name is CXX):
https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Catalogue-of-Rules.html#Catalogue-of-Rules
I think ship sailed a long time ago for cpp being an unambiguous
abbreviation for the c-preprecessor over C++.
just my 2ยข
On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 7:38:05 AM UTC-4, Bart Janssens wrote:
>
> I like the sound of CxxWrap.jl. I was reluctant to use Cxx, to avoid
> giving the impression there is a dependency on Cxx.jl, but in the future I
> may actually use Cxx.jl to replace the current ccall usage, so then that is
> no longer an objection.
>
> I'll give it a few more days and then proceed with the rename to and
> registration of CxxWrap.jl
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bart
>
> On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 12:37:52 PM UTC+1, Morten Piibeleht wrote:
>>
>> I would second Erik, CXX seems to be the standard way of referring to C++
>> (e.g. in makefiles), and it would be consistent with Cxx.jl.
>>
>> Also, maybe the shorter "CxxWrap.jl"? Sounds a tiny bit better to me
>> ("wrap C++ code in Julia") whereas CxxWrapper could be interpreted as
>> "wrapper around something (C++ toolchain?)".
>>
>>
