Re: [boost] [log] Boost.Log formal review

Subject: Re: [boost] [log] Boost.Log formal review
From: Roland Bock (rbock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-10 13:02:58

Andrey Semashev wrote:
> On 03/10/2010 10:06 AM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
>>
>> Don't you think that using the word 'attribute' to mean 'function that
>> computes attribute value' is bound to cause confusion? Is there some
>> better name?
> 
> In conjunction with the attribute semantics (e.g. "the current time 
> stamp attribute" or "the current thread identifier attribute") the term 
> makes sense to me. Do you have a better suggestion?

The documentation is pretty clear regarding attributes. I read it before 
experimenting and therefore did not have problems with the semantics.

But I agree that "attribute" representing a function is not the most 
intuitive thing I've ever seen. For instance, the "current time stamp" 
is a value (THE current time stamp). I would thus not normally interpret 
"current time stamp attribute" as a function.

Personally I'd go with any of

attribute_function/attribute_provider/attribute_generator/attribute_computer

and

attribute_value

Regards,

Roland