[boost] nonary_function OK?

From: Nicolai Josuttis (nicolai.josuttis_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-06-15 12:21:30

A related discussion to the compose discussion:
I have also introduced type nonary_function as supplement for
unary_function and binary_function for functions that take
no arguments.
Question:
 Is the name nonary_function fine or should I use another name
 (e.g. Kevin van Horn uses in his functor extensions
  nullary_functions as far as I know) ?

Nico

------------------------------------------------------------------------

eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/boost
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications