Re: [boost] [lockfree review] rfc: naming and interface

Subject: Re: [boost] [lockfree review] rfc: naming and interface
From: Joshua Juran (jjuran_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-07-21 05:58:34

On Jul 21, 2011, at 2:46 AM, Tim Blechmann wrote:

> i am starting a new thread, because i want to start a new  
> discussion on one
> aspect of boost.lockfree: the naming of the data structure and the  
> interface
>
>
> naming:
> the current names of the data structures are fifo, stack and  
> ringbuffer. during
> the pre-review some people suggested to use different names, lifo  
> instead of
> stack or queue instead of fifo.
> in general i think it is a good idea to use a consistent naming  
> (probably fifo
> should be renamed to queue), but how does the ringbuffer come in?  
> it is a queue
> as well, but with different characteristics (spsc and wait-free).

I generally prefer plain English over acronyms -- especially since  
stack and queue are terms and concepts well-understood by computer  
scientists, but LIFO and FIFO may require mentally deducing which one  
is which.  So my vote is on "stack" and "queue".

As for "ringbuffer", I would consider shortening it to just "ring".

Josh