Re: [boost] [string] proposal

Subject: Re: [boost] [string] proposal
From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-27 10:04:15

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Stewart, Robert
<Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Dean Michael Berris wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Stewart, Robert
>> <Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> > Names are important. Â I think this discussion would make
>> > more progress if Dean's "string" were given another name,
>> > like "bytes," and his "view" were named "string" or perhaps
>> > "string_view."
>>
>> Okay, I think I have to divorce the thought of "what a string should
>> be" from the name "string". I like `bytes` but unfortunately it
>> somehow implicitly conveys mutability -- because computers keep
>> reading and writing bytes after all. Maybe a name that denotes
>> immutability would be good.
>
> "bytes" conveys mutability no more nor less than does "string."
>

Right. And it's 5 letters too. :D

>> So for lack of a more creative name, I'll call it `istring` which
>> conveys immutability and string semantics.
>
> That's short, but not descriptive. Â The "i" prefix is more suggestive of "interface" than "immutable" to me. Â Why not just go whole hog and call it "immutable_string" as Artyom suggested?
>

The only objection really is that it's too long. :D Less characters is better.

/me gets a thesaurus and looks up string :D

-- 
Dean Michael Berris
about.me/deanberris