The future of the name "ref"
david.abrahams at rcn.com
Sat Jan 5 03:06:08 CET 2002
I really want to get rid of this name by its current meaning. One reason is
that "ref" already means something very different in namespace boost: it
generates a reference wrapper for its argument for use with the bind and
function libraries. I expect that Boost.Python users will want to use
boost::ref() for this purpose, since in the new system we traffic much more
heavily in function objects.
Another reason is that the generalized "reference<>" smart pointer template
is almost never instantiated with anything other than PyObject as its
template parameter (ref is just a typedef for reference<PyObject>), and
"reference" would be a far superior name for what we're currently calling
I realize that this would be a change that breaks backward-compatibility,
but now is the time to do that, since the new standard-conformant system
will neccessarily break backward-compatibility for some users. I'd like to
hear if there are any serious objections or modifications to the idea.
David Abrahams, C++ library designer for hire
C++ Booster (http://www.boost.org)
email: david.abrahams at rcn.com
More information about the Cplusplus-sig