Re: [boost] [interprocess, aka shmem] Some proposals for open issues from the review

From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-28 11:55:45

> On 2/27/06, Ion Gaztañaga <igaztanaga_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> named_shared_memory
>>> named_mapped_file
>>> named_heap_memory
>>> etc.
>> Some users have suggested more descriptive names:
>>
>> objects_in_shared_memory
>> objects_in_mapped_file
>> objects_in_heap_memory
>> objects_in_user_memory
> I don't exactly understand where plural form cames from. Isn't, for
> example, current named_shared_object references _single_ shared memory
> block?

Yes, but you create named/anonymous "objects" or "instances" of classes 
using construct<> functions. That's why they have proposed "objects".

Best,

Ion