Re: [boost] [fixed_string] Why "fixed" rather than "static"?

On 28. Nov 2019, at 13:12, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 12:56 AM Andrzej Krzemienski via Boost wrote:

...

why was this library called fixed_string?

It was a mistake. It was originally static_string (it came from beast[1]) but someone suggested changing it and I listened. Oh well.

We already discussed the name a bit. At the danger of getting into bike-shedding (but names are important): Mateusz made the proposal "fixed_capacity_string", which is long but more precise than either static_string or fixed_string. I don't find the long name problematic, because I assume that this type wont often appear in interfaces, but rather somewhere deep in the implementation. Yet another idea: array_string Best regards, Hans