Subject: [boost] Application 0.4.6 with global_context.
From: Renato Forti (rtforti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-04-15 07:22:39
Hi, thanks for your comments.
>> If the main usage is likely to be 'daemonic', then Boost.Daemon would
still be a good name.
About the name 'application'.
I chose this name because the library can support many kinds of
>> From the current name, one would be unlikely to guess that it could do
The name 'Daemon' is usual in POSIX world. In Windows world the usual is
I could call it as 'server', but it would also be wrong due to support for
common application. In future the library can support other kinds of
application (e.g. apache httpd modules)
Thus I think that the name 'application' is more suitable.
Let me know your thoughts.
Thanks for help
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk