Re: [boost] [iostreams] please vote on template names

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-13 09:38:35

"Jeff Flinn" <TriumphSprint2000_at_[hidden]> writes:

> "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
> news:db1bn4$gad$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
>> Rob Stewart wrote:
>>> From: "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]>
>>
>> But speaking of "buf/stream," how about using "buf" and "stream"? E.g.,
>>
>>   typedef stream<file> filestream;
>>   typedef buf<file>    filebuf;
>>
>>   typedef stream<array> arraystream;
>>   typedef buf<array>    arraybuf;
>
> I like these the best so far, particularly 'stream'. Thinking about seeing 
> 'buf' appearing in code some time in the future without all of the context 
> in this thread is a little unsettling. Perhaps 'buf' should be 
> un-abbreviated to 'buffer'? Although this fly's in the face of JW's thoughts 
> on the non-buffer nature of streambuf.

Sounds like stream<X> and streambuf<X> might be a good choice.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com