[boost] Re: array-wrapper or vector with static size (was

From: Jon Jagger (Jon.Jagger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-01-04 18:30:47

> > >Darin Adler wrote:
> > >THIS is an important design issue. Unless somebody has a solution to
> > >fit
> > >both needs, we have to decide between what I would call an
> > > - array wrapper and
> > > - an STL container  similar to vector with static size.
> > >Or may be we introduce both.
> > >
> > >However, if we introduce both, then we need a name for both
> > >(I' suggest array for the array wrapper and ???vector for the
> > latter).
> > >
> > >Opinions, please!

Ok. Here's mine. Schools of naming thought...

/1/  array  and  array_adaptor/array_wrapper

Nice because the implementation uses a raw array.
The use of 'array' is a strong in "array_adaptor/array_wrapper" (where the
adapted raw array is visible) but weaker for "array" (where the contained
raw array is not so visible).

/2/  fixed_vector  and  fixed_vector_adaptor/fixed_vector_wrapper

Nice because the use of vector hints at the container model. And conversely
the use of 'vector' is weak in "fixed_vector_adaptor/fixed_vector_wrapper"
(where the adapted array is visible) but strong for "fixed_vector" (where
the contained raw array is not so visible). Also nice because it doesn't
use the name array, which I think is best left as the name of a raw C
array.

In summary, using 'array' focuses on the implementation and using 'vector'
focuses on the interface.

My preferece is for /2/

And I prefer adaptor to wrapper.

$0.02
Jon Jagger

We have one mouth, two eyes, and two ears and we should use them in
proportion.