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

From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-12 09:50:12

From: "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]>
> "JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z" <joaquin_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:31c83531e9c8.31e9c831c835_at_tid.es...
> >
> >namespace boost{
> >  namespace multi_index{
> >    template<...>
> >    class indexed_container;
> >  }
> >  using multi_index::indexed_container;
> >}
> 
> I think multi_indexed_container (or multi_index_container) would be a
> better name. A long name doesn't hurt here since
> the container will take some lines to setup with typedef etc anyway.
> 
> Then the class could be in the boost namespace and there could be a
> helper namespace, index, which stored the index_list, unique etc.
> 
> This would make the setup of the container look quite good IMO:
> 
> typedef multi_indexed_container<
>   employee,
>   index::index_list<
           ^^^^^^^^^^

Why not just "index::list?"

>     index::ordered_unique<index::identity<employee> >,
>     index::ordered_non_unique<index::member<employee,int,&employee:age> >,
>     index::sequenced<>
>   >
> > employee_set;
> 
> Before I wasn't sure where member, identity etc came from.

It was the same namespace before, but I very much like your
suggestion.  The lingering question in my mind is whether your
"index" namespace should be called "multi_index."  That would tie
the namespace to the class better and means that the library
could be called Boost.MultiIndex without leading to confusion.

-- 
Rob Stewart                           stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer                     http://www.sig.com
Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;