imp mostly uses get_x() sort of names so far (there are a couple of exceptions).I use CamelCaseWe 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;}
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).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
Within a method is fine. Polluting someone else's code or the imp namespace, not so much :-)5. using namespace are we ok with using namespace std for the IMP classes ??