On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 23:58 +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> If you are implementing the BetterStringBuffer (next generation)
> objects, I'd go with RefString or similar. Since its ref-counted.
It is better not to expose implementation detail in a class name.
Besides, if the new class has no string manipulation functions and just
manages opaque blobs of data, then it should not have a "string" in its
name.
> If you want to be pedantic about the printable char issue, DataBuffer
> makes more descriptive sense.
Printable chars are irrelevant (Adrian went too far on that minor
detail). It is about the meaning of the contents and associated
search/interpretation operations, not print-ability.
Alex.
Received on Wed Aug 27 2008 - 17:34:02 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Aug 27 2008 - 12:00:06 MDT