Also, you know, doesn't raise as many eyebrows among non-techies when you start discussing 'STD pointers' in polite company.
I feel like if you're talking about the C++ Standard Library in polite company, you're not polite company.
How do you pronounce 'ptr'?
I feel like if you're talking about the C++ Standard Library in polite company, you're not polite company.
I have never, ever, heard anyone say "putter". Sounds like it belongs with a "getter" :lol:
Y u do dis, Herb?
Just lots a little respect for the man 
std::shared_ptr "stid shared putter"
Can you elaborate on why you pronounce that as "stid shared putter" when clearly the expanded name, according to its own documentation, is "standard shared pointer"?
std::shared_ptr "stid shared putter"Can you elaborate on why you pronounce that as "stid shared putter" when clearly the expanded name, according to its own documentation, is "standard shared pointer"?
I almost never write "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" in place of "NASA," either.
Also, "shared_ptr" is the proper name of a type, whereas "fooPtr" is the name of a variable and therefore (at least in my thinking) has a weaker identity than shared_ptr. I usually pronounce "size_t" as "size tee" for the same reason, despite "size tee" and "size type" having the same number of syllables. Sure, everyone I'd ever talk to about this would know what "shared pointer" or "size type" is, but by using a more literal pronunciation I save everyone the extra mental step of evaluating that association from "shared pointer" -> "shared_ptr" AND make it clear that I'm talking about raw std::shared_ptr in particular. The former may seem silly in isolation, but I have found that these things add up over the course of a day when working on an especially complicated codebase. The latter is important because I have worked in multiple codebases that defined their own smart pointer classes, some of which were almost (but not quite) equivalent to std::shared_ptr and were even named very similarly. One such project went as far as to define a type alias of shared_ptr that used a custom allocator, but it also used unadorned shared_ptr in a couple of other places. Both were "shared pointers," but behaved differently in terms of where their memory went, so we needed to distinguish between between the two somehow. Rendering the typenames literally was an easy way to handle that.
Oddly enough, I sometimes pronounce it "shared pointer" in my internal monologue, but not (usually) out loud.
Can you elaborate on why you pronounce that as "stid shared putter" when clearly the expanded name, according to its own documentation, is "standard shared pointer"?std::shared_ptr "stid shared putter"
I almost never write "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" in place of "NASA," either.
http://data.grammarbook.com/blog/abbreviations/abbreviations-acronyms-and-initialisms-revisited/
"STD", in this context, is an abbreviation, but is neither an acronym or initialism. It should be pronounced "standard". Now, if we were talking about sexually transmitted diseases, then it would be an initialism and should be pronounced S-T-D.
well when I read through my code I say ptr as it is.
put -er where not playing mini golf are we.
Can you elaborate on why you pronounce that as "stid shared putter" when clearly the expanded name, according to its own documentation, is "standard shared pointer"?std::shared_ptr "stid shared putter"
I almost never write "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" in place of "NASA," either.
http://data.grammarbook.com/blog/abbreviations/abbreviations-acronyms-and-initialisms-revisited/
"STD", in this context, is an abbreviation, but is neither an acronym or initialism. It should be pronounced "standard". Now, if we were talking about sexually transmitted diseases, then it would be an initialism and should be pronounced S-T-D.
I'm not sure how the way it should be pronounced follows from the fact that it is neither an acronym nor an initialism. In fact, my instinct is that the fact that "std" doesn't necessarily fall into either of these categories means there isn't an automatically-prescribed pronunciation.
I also don't know if it's entirely obvious that it's not an acronym, since there are quite a few commonly-accepted definitions of acronyms that don't really seem to preclude "std" from being an acronym for "standard," even if it'd be a fairly idiosyncratic example.
In any event, the thing that actually confuses me is how strongly people feel about certain usages despite being perfectly forgiving for other things that are decidedly less standard. Like this, for instance.
Y u do dis, Herb?
Just lots a little respect for the man
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
