From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-11-08 15:25:40
on 11/7/00 5:13 PM, Jeremy Siek at jsiek_at_[hidden] wrote:
> A question about the "archetypes". These classes are just more operator
> bundles, right?
The archetype operator bundles have a special semantic meaning from the
other bundles. The regular bundles just connect related operations
together. The archetype ones make groups representing the operations the
standard numeric or iterator types have.
> I'll be using the term "archetype" in the concept checking library (and in a
> paper describing concept checking) to mean something quite different: a
> minimalistic class that *models* a concept.
And the archetype operator bundles help a class model a numeric or iterator
> I think it would be good to keep the terminology separate.
I use "archetype" for documentation purposes, but don't put it in a class.
If you do the same, where's the conflict? Do you think users will confuse
your doc's _archetype_ with my doc's _archetype_?
-- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT mac DOT com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk