| -----Original Message----- | From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org | [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Pavel Vozenilek | Sent: 19 March 2004 22:55 | To: boost@lists.boost.org | Subject: [boost] Naming Issues [part of Formal Review: Indexed Set] | | Here are my suggestion of names, with rationale: | | 1. the data structure should be named "multi_container" | and should reside (or be lifted) in boost namespace. | | Rationale: it is superset of std::set/multiset/list | and possibly slist and deque). Therefore the "multi". | The structure is important and will be probably | unique - therefore the boost namespace. | | 2. library specific names that won't fit into boost | namespace should be in "multiindex" namespace. The 'ii' looks a bit un-english. I would use a hyphen - as I am sure would Lynn Truss of "Eats, Shoots and Leaves' fame. (I felt this about the documentation too) So how about multi_index? Also consistent with "multi_container" where a _ is used? | Rationale: it will be used mainly for index related | names. The name is aso reasonably short. | | 3. indexes should be named: set_like, multiset_like, | list_like, slist_like, deque_like. | | Rationale: it gives idea to user what it is about (more | than e.g. sequenced). | | 4. Since indexed_set::unique may clash with std::unique | I suggest to use words "distinctive", "non_distinctive". | | Rationale: I found it in a dictionary as the only | one word synonum to unique. English native comment welcomed. I see no need for the suffix 'ive - how about just "distinct"? The only other word that comes to mind with a similar meaning is "sole" Unique is really unique. Is there _really_ a clash with STL usage? Paul PS Truly English native speaker of english unsullied by the ex-colonials ;-) Paul A Bristow Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB +44 1539 561830 +44 7714 330204 mailto: pbristow@hetp.u-net.com