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

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-14 09:15:51

"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>> "Jeff Flinn" writes:
>>> "Jonathan Turkanis" wrote in message
>
>>>> But speaking of "buf/stream," how about using "buf" and "stream"?
>>>> E.g.,
>
>>> 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.
>
> I'm afraid that readers of library documentation and user code will get
> boost::iostreams::streambuf and std::streambuf mixed up. Otherwise, it would be
> my first choice.

No problem; just use qualification. you can also tell people there's a
namespace alias in place for boost::iostreams

      namespace io = boost::iostreams;

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