From: Kevlin Henney (kevlin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-11-07 14:05:43
In message <200011060636_MC2-B9C6-C18B_at_[hidden]>, John Maddock
>>I would argue that "compile-time assert" is MUCH less confusing.
>I personally don't care what it's called, except that last time this was
>discussed "static assert" seemed to win out (after a very long argument).
>Maybe its time to invoke egroups poll facilities?
Might be an idea.
Another thought might be to use the same naming convention that the
template meta-programming library intends to use -- IIRC, that was a
stand off between meta, compile-time and Connecticut.
Kevlin Henney phone: +44 117 942 2990
Curbralan Limited mobile: +44 7801 073 508
mailto:kevlin_at_[hidden] fax: +44 870 052 2289
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk