Re: [boost] Re: Re: [indexed_set] revised naming proposal

From: Joaquín Mª López Muñoz (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-12 01:20:00

Hi Arkadiy,

Arkadiy Vertleyb ha escrito:

> "JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z" <joaquin_at_[hidden]> wrote
>
> > I'm really lost here, naming issues are so nasty.
> > Looking fwd to knowing your ideas.
>
> I think we have a rather generic situation here, which is the library has
> one main class.  In which case it would be rather natural to have the
> class's name the same as the library name, and the same as namespace name.
>
> Except that the class name would clash with the namespace.
>
> There are a few other libraries in Boost that are like this, such as
> lexical_cast, threads, function, etc.  Some don't have their own namespaces,
> and just live in "boost" (however, the question is what to do with the
> supporting classes?  There might be quite a few of them, and one doesn't
> want to pollute the boost namespace with the library-specific things).
> Others add the suffix 's' to form the namespace name (like tuple and
> tuples).
>
> I think at least one good name was found here, and this is "multi_index".  I
> honestly think this name should be reserved for the class, and this class
> should be under "boost" (or promoted to boost).  This is what you had
> before, when you had "indexed_set" and "indexed_sets".  I kind of lost the
> track of why this kind of naming was rejected.
>

This is prmiarly my concern. indexed_set can no longer be regarded
as a generalized *set* since sequenced (list-like) indices were brought in.

>
> I think that in the situation like this, the library name and the namespace
> name should be just derived from the class name using one consistent scheme.
>
> So what about accepting the Boost.Tuple scheme, and having "multi_index",
> "Boost.MultiIndex", and "multi_indexes" (or multi_indices)?  I would still
> preffer "indexes", but native English speakers might not agree with me :)
>

This is just my personal opinion, but multi_index, not being a noun but
rather an adjective, does not seems appropriate to name a container.

Regards,

Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo