Subject: Re: [boost] Fwd: Re: [log] review part 1
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-14 22:39:50
Andrey Semashev wrote:
>> I agree with other comments that I saw about Attribute being
>> a poor choice for what it does. I would prefer that the term
>> should be used for what you call an "Attribute Value," and that
>> there should be a different term, like "Attribute Extractor" for
>> what you call an "Attribute."
> My understanding of the term "attribute" is that it's some kind of
> meta-information that defines the concrete values that will be attached
> to log records. I'm ready to agree that the word "attribute" doesn't
> bring my intention precisely, but the alternatives don't quite get
> closer. "Extractors" are reserved for another tool in the library.
Now that I've read more of the documentation, I think I
see what you mean. How about "attribute generator"?