From: "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com>
Sylvester-Bradley, Gareth wrote (in private email):
Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
I guess streambuf_wrapper / stream_wrapper suffer from the same lack of to/from clarity as streambuf_adapter / stream_adapter?
To me they sound unambiguous, but with the wrong meaning.
I'm not sure which you were saying had the wrong meaning, but I thought about streambuf_adapter/stream_adapter, and I think those are great names. The class templates are adapting a Device type to be another type--a streambuf or stream--like those in namespace std.
Can I offer another suggestion, taking inspiration from several other Boost libraries, like enable_if, result_of, etc?
How about streambuf_from / stream_from (or _with, _of, _on, _over, ...)?
Iostreams also uses this type of name: category_of, char_type_of and mode_of.
streambuf_from / stream_from look pretty good when they are specialized:
streambuf_from<array> stream_from<socket>
That sounds a little weird, but it isn't terrible. Oh, I just came back to this part because I realized what didn't sound right: these are class templates, not function templates, yet "from" suggests a return value to me.
but I'm afraid they will look funny in documentation. E.g.,
The fundamental component provided by the Iostreams library is the class template streambuf_from, a derived class of std::basic_streambuf which performs i/o by delegating to a contained Device.
There are lots of names that don't flow well in a description like that. I don't think that should interfere too much with name selection. -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;