Re: [boost] [atomic] Bikeshedding over address-free waiting/notifying operation names

On Mon, 1 Jun 2020 at 06:18, Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

On 2020-06-01 13:50, degski wrote:

...

On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 16:05, Andrey Semashev via Boost mailto:boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

The "address-free" term comes from the C++ standard, but the resulting names seem a bit long. Maybe there are better suggestions?

What about "global_"-prefix or "_system"-post-fix ("_sys")?

Hmm, that doesn't quite communicate the difference from the default operations.

On the assumption that the std-post-fixes have already extensively been bike-shedded, any alternative will likely be a compromise between length and descriptiveness, so your 'hmmm ...' is natural, I'm thinking about words around 'virtual memory' (because that's where the non-local addresses come from), while "_virtual" is out of the question. degski -- @systemdeg https://www.instapaper.com http://instapaper.com "We value your privacy, click here!" Sod off! - degski