Re: [boost] Re: mpl/loki

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-12 15:27:47

David Abrahams wrote:
> Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
> > IMO we should just stop using 'void_' for internal purposes and give it
> > up to users :).
>
> I am still unsure about 'void_' being better than 'nil' or
> 'null'....  Users already have a type, 'void', which means void.

... in conventional run-time programs. Unfortunately, 'void' is not special
for metaprograms, many of which have a need to routinely manipulate it along
with all other built-in types. 'mpl::void_' addresses this issue.

> There's no correspondence between void_ and void the way there is
> between bool_ and bool.

'void_' in MPL plays a role very similar to a role of  'void' in the core
language. So, conceptually, there is a correspondence. Personally, I
appreciate the analogy, dislike 'null'/'nil'/etc. for the lack of such, and
would like to keep the name.

Aleksey