Re: [boost] [shmem] Some proposals for open issues from the review

David Abrahams wrote:

"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:

...

IPC > InterProcess, even for a library that is not just for communications. It's a better name, not necessarily a better description, just like Shmem is a better name than shared_memory.

Shptr<T> x(new T)

?? ;-)

shared_pointer<T> x( new T ); ? :-) shared_ownership_pointer<T> x( new T ); ?? :-)) Shptr<> is actually not that bad, but shared_ptr > Shptr because of the scoped/auto/weak_ptr relatives.

Seriously, why is "Shmem" better than "shared_memory?"

Because it's short and unique. You can still pronounce it "shared memory", if you like.