Re: [boost] Re: resource manager naming

From: Joel de Guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-28 10:55:14

David Abrahams wrote:
> Dave Gomboc <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
>>>> 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<>.
> 
> I'm with Dave G. on this one.  resource<lock> doesn't tell me
> anything; I already know that every lock is a resource.

Yes, but not all resources are locks. 

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