"Jeff Flinn" <TriumphSprint2000@hotmail.com> writes:
"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message news:db1bn4$gad$1@sea.gmane.org...
Rob Stewart wrote:
From: "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com>
But speaking of "buf/stream," how about using "buf" and "stream"? E.g.,
typedef stream<file> filestream; typedef buf<file> filebuf;
typedef stream<array> arraystream; typedef buf<array> arraybuf;
I like these the best so far, particularly 'stream'. Thinking about seeing 'buf' appearing in code some time in the future without all of the context in this thread is a little unsettling. Perhaps 'buf' should be un-abbreviated to 'buffer'? Although this fly's in the face of JW's thoughts on the non-buffer nature of streambuf.
Sounds like stream<X> and streambuf<X> might be a good choice. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com