Re: [boost] Re: resource manager naming

From: Joel de Guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-28 01:29:43

Dave Gomboc wrote:
>>> So then reverse resource_manager and get managed_resource<>, or just
>>> managed<>.
>> 
>> Why not just resource<>? Management is implied anyway; that's the
>> reason for the existence of the class.
> 
> *laugh*  I was thinking exactly the opposite.  To me, the resource
> itself 
> is clear from the template parameter -- it's the management that
> needs to 
> be indicated.
> 
> +1 for managed<>.

What template parameter? That's not a part of the name. 
Template parameters, just like function arguments are never
a part of the name. You do not need to read the header file
to get the essence. The name itself should indicate the function
of the class without looking elsewhere.

managed<>? What is managed? ... answer: take a look at
the template parameter and you'll see what I mean. I'm
sorry, that doesn't make sense.

-- 
Joel de Guzman
joel at boost-consulting.com
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net