Re: [boost] [process] Formal Review starts today, 27 October

Subject: Re: [boost] [process] Formal Review starts today, 27 October
From: Gavin Lambert (gavinl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-10-31 18:02:42

On 1/11/2016 03:27, Edward Diener wrote:
> I found the notation for the std_out, std_err, and std_in to be exactly
> the opposite of what I would expect. I would think std_out and std_err
> would use a '<' notation and std_in would use a '>' notation. But using
> the pipes was fairly straightforward. I found the naming in the tutorial
> a bit strange, where a bp::opstream is called 'in' and a bp::ipstream is
> called 'out'.

bp::std_out > stdout
bp::std_out > "output.txt"
bp::std_in < "input.txt"

These seem the right way around to me, and reminiscent of how they're 
used in a shell; just with the extra keyword in front.  Pretend the 
keyword is the process name instead.

Having said that, due to the presence of the keyword, perhaps assignment 
would be a better syntax, similar to bp::args?  eg:

bp::std_out = stdout
bp::std_out = "output.txt"
bp::std_in = "input.txt"

?