Re: [boost] Futures (was: Re: [compute] Some remarks)

Subject: Re: [boost] Futures (was: Re: [compute] Some remarks)
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-12 17:32:23

On 12 Jan 2015 at 16:19, Sylvester-Bradley, Gareth wrote:

> On 12 January 2015 15:30, Niall Douglas wrote:
> > On 7 Jan 2015 at 12:40, Thomas Heller wrote:
> > > Just a minor very unrelated remark. I find the name "BindLib" very confusing.
> >
> > The library is a toolkit for locally binding libraries into
> > namespaces :).
> 
> I've not come across the word 'Bind' used this way in C++, and of course it is used for other things.
> 
> Would 'Alias' or 'NamespaceAlias' work?

Those unfortunately have even more confusing alternative meanings in 
C++. AliasLib makes me think pointer aliasing. NamespaceAliasLib is 
too long I think, and besides you're not aliasing namespaces, you're 
aliasing types.

I do agree about BindLib being a poor name. It is actually onto its 
third choice of name now :( but to date, it's the least terrible of 
the reasonably descriptive library names I have thought of. Do bear 
in mind it doesn't just mount libraries into namespaces, it also 
provides an emulation of Boost.Test using CATCH, an emulation of 
Boost.Config using C++ 17 feature detect, and some preprocessor 
metaprogramming to have the compiler auto generate correct bind 
namespaces on inline and non-inline namespace compilers (i.e. 
VS2013).

Some other names I have thought of are TypedefLib, LocalCppBindLib, 
another was BoostStandaloneLib and ModularBoostLib. All are obtuse or 
too long.

Any better names gratefully received.

Niall

-- 
ned Productions Limited Consulting
http://www.nedproductions.biz/ 
http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/