|
Boost : |
From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-06-15 09:46:20
At 12:04 AM 6/15/99 -0700, Jerry Schwarz wrote:
>How about something like
>
>compose_f_gx
>compose_f_gx_hx
>compose_f_gx_hy
>compose_f_gxy
>
>I think those names are transparent enough that I don't need to
explain which is
>which, and I think they're uniform enough that they would be easy to
remember.
The best suggestion so far IMO. Extends nicely too.
The _f seems redundant. Could we drop it (and adjust accordingly)?
compose_fx
compose_fx_gx
compose_fx_gy
compose_fxy
--Beman
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/boost
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk