Jeff Garland <jeff <at> crystalclearsoftware.com> writes:
I didn't think of a general alternative name for the library. Boost.MultiIndex?
Can't tell that it relates to containers...
Boost.Multicontainer?
Yeah, but why doesn't it include multi_array? I don't think this one can work.
Boost.Container.MultiIndex (in sync with the namespace)?
Would be my choice except I think Boost Multi-Index Containers reads better and would be fine even if the namespace boost::container::multi_index.
I vote for the fully-spelled out 'Multi-Indexed Containers'. Multi-Index doesn't have much meaning when separated from the 'container' part of the name, and Multi-Container is misleading. 'namespace boost::container::multi_index' seems fine in code, though.
Well, I'm actually not very concerned about the namespace -- it's the directory structure that is a major hassle to fix: CVS, doc pointers, etc. Its possible the other authors of containers won't want to refactor the directory structure.
Somewhat off-topic - has sourceforge made any pronouncements regarding a possible migration to SVN? Aside from easing problems with directories and moving, I would have thought they'd have a lot to gain from it's implementation details.