First of all I really appreciate the interprocess Boost library for its rich set of synchronization primitives and shared memory techniques. Now to my gentle ( maybe not so gentle ) criticism. What was the reason for using C-style null-terminated strings in much of the functionality rather than std::basic_string ? Isn't it about time, in the advanced C++ libraries of today, that we should wean ourselves aay from C-isms, which no C++ programmer, unles on pain of supporting hopelessly legacy style code, has not used in years and years ? To see constructors taking C-style strings rather than std::basic_string in a modern C++ library like interprocess is a real psychological disappointment. At the very, very least, the author of the library should have also provided the equivalent functionality with std::basic_string. Please Boost developers, C++ programmers deserve not to deal with C-style strings anymore. Personally I do not think anything new coming out of the C++, including the C++ standard committee, should have any functionality taking a 'const charType *' from now to to the end of C++ eternity <g>. Other than the above I really enjoy using interprocess and say bravo to the author of the library for a well thought out implementation. But how this C-ism got by the reviewers I will never know.