Re: [boost] there already is an ASIO.

From: Jose (jmalv04_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-27 12:13:25

I have some ideas for library naming in the Boost context:

For a small library, the name should be descriptive like
Boost.ProgramOptions,
so by looking at the name you already know what the library does.

For a large library, in practice, it has two names, the acronym (also
namespace) and
the full name. The acronym is best when it's short. So the boost examples
are:

The Boost Graph Library - or BGL
C++ Template Metaprogramming  (Boost Template Metaprogramming Library) - or
MPL

In these cases the full name matches also the title of the published books.
So for the
current asio it probably makes sense to establish the short and long names
now, given the broad
appeal for the library.

So for asio you could consider these names

The Boost IO Library  - BIL
C++ IO Library - IOL

The short name should not have any hyphens as it doesn't look nice in the
namespace.
It is also good to check in Google that the acronym is not widely used.
If you check BGL or MPL, you get the right link in the first results

On 4/27/06, James McCartney <asynth_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 27, 2006, at 5:34 AM, Christopher Kohlhoff wrote:
>
> > What I mean is that Asio is not intended to stand for anything,
> > i.e. it is not an abbreviation.
> >
> > Yes, the letters "io" in the name are meant to convey that it is
> > related to I/O, and the overall name is supposed to suggest
> > asynchronicity. However it was conceived as a name only, not a
> > shortened form.
> >
> > Q: Does asio stand for:
> >
> >   ASynchronous I/O
> >   Asynchronous and Synchronous I/O
> >   All Sorts of I/O
> >
> > A: No, it doesn't stand for anything; or
> >
> > A: Whatever works for you :)
>
> So, the name functions sort of like a brand or trademark, then. Hmm..
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>