Re: [boost] Re: New New Callbacks Uploaded

From: Kevlin Henney (kevlin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-02 13:37:34

In message <20001202114118.0136c0f0.gregod_at_[hidden]>, Douglas Gregor
<gregod_at_[hidden]> writes
>> A possible naming convention has been staring me in the face for ages,
>> and I'm disappointed I didn't see it before: any_function. This follows
>> any and other any_* classes that I have to resolve the template/virtual
>> issue, eg any_iterator.
>> 
>> This seems to accurately describe its role, reads well in an arg list,
>> sidesteps the issue of callbacks/events/etc, and has clearer value-based
>> semantics.
>
>I like the idea, but I still think the name chosen must show that it is 
>generalized for function objects, not functions, e.g., 
>any_functor/any_function_obj.

In which case the name any_function is entirely appropriate: it is
generalised for functions and function objects.

Kevlin
____________________________________________________________

  Kevlin Henney                   phone:  [phone]
  Curbralan Limited               mobile: [phone]
  mailto:kevlin_at_[hidden]     fax:    [phone]
  http://www.curbralan.com
____________________________________________________________