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.
