From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-01 01:57:32
On 7/1/06, Caleb Epstein <caleb.epstein_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I like this utility, but I agree it might be better named
I like the utlitity too, however I'm not really sure about "interned"
-- having been exposed only to the GoF Flyweight pattern.
Perhaps boost::interned<T> and boost::flyweight<T> can be made
identical or behave the same? What I would be saying really is that
boost::interned can apply the "value instance singularity" (invented
phrase, something I try to describe how I understand what the library
is doing) while boost::flyweight<T> be consistent with the GoF
Would it be too much work to do this?
-- Dean Michael C. Berris C/C++ Software Architect Orange and Bronze Software Labs http://3w-agility.blogspot.com/ http://cplusplus-soup.blogspot.com/ Mobile: +639287291459 Email: dean [at] orangeandbronze [dot] com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk