Boost logo

Boost :

From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-25 07:22:00


<Bjorn.Karlsson_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:3D8559AE95B4D611B02C0002557C6C8BA4DB73_at_STH-EXCH...
> > From: Thorsten Ottosen [mailto:nesotto_at_[hidden]]
>
> > > I'd say that for boost::filesystem, Dave's suggestion
> > "files" would be a
> > > great compromise.
> >
> > Why plural? We seldom name classes in plural.
>
> Good question, and I'm not really sure I can answer it very well (but I'll
> try):
>
> * It can be mentally expanded to files...ystem.

then fs is better IMO.

> * Some names work "best" in plural (like signals, type_traits, iterators,
> operators); this is of course very much IMHO.

are they the names of namespaces?

> * Just "file" seems a bit restrictive to me, but when I think about the
> namespace "files" I read "files 'n other related stuff, too".

then maybe it should be namespace io? Just like a big namespace for
algorithms, io
could hold file handling, zip streams, formatters etc.

br

Thorsten


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk