On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Peter Dimov <lists@pdimov.com> wrote:
Ralph Tandetzky wrote:
On 02/09/2013 05:25 PM, Peter Dimov wrote:
Ralph Tandetzky wrote:
I would really like to get feedback on the design of cow_ptr<T> >> <https://github.com/ralphtandetzky/cow_ptr.git> rather than discussing, >> if copy-on-write is a useful pattern in general.
Looks pretty good, but I don't like the name much.
Ralph, IMO this library is useful (should not be overused, though). But I don't like the name either.
What's wrong with the name?
Well.
1. It's an acronym. 2. ... but uses lowercase. 3. It's a farm animal. 4. ... enticing you to use member function names such as "moo".
:) this got me wondering if the Moo language uses COW a lot.
5. It is sufficiently descriptive for one of the primary use cases (eliminating redundant expensive copies) but not for the other (a polymorphic value pointer).