Re: [boost] [scope_guard] Naming roundup

From: Andrey Semashev (andysem_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-23 15:35:20

Jason Kankiewicz wrote:
> While I served in an English-speaking military organization, placing
> someone on active guard duty was to "post" them and removing them from
> active guard duty was to "relieve" them.
>
> Now, if "dismiss" is the preferred term for deactivating a guard,
> perhaps "summon" would be its more appropriate opposite?
>

Yes, the "summon" was one of the versions discussed. But it won't be 
good-looking in users code. See the discussion in the main thread 
"[scope_guard] New revision available + naming consideration".

> Andrey Semashev wrote:
>> - guard/dismiss. On the on hand, the commonly used "dismiss" should
>> look familiar. On the other, its meaning is too strong in regard of
>> the function semantic. The "guard" may be used as well but the word
>> is already frequently used. Besides, the guard's status enum values'
>> names propably won't corellate with these words (I just don't see
>> the active status name with root "guard" - guard::guarding? :(  ).
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost