Boost logo

Boost :

From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-07 19:20:12

At 02:34 PM 12/7/2000 -0600, Ed Brey wrote:

> ...
>Really, I suppose this is narrow-minded, though. A cast can simply be
>thought of as a type converter, and just because casts have followed a
>more specific pattern in the past doesn't mean they have to.
>So, I think you are right, that we can take cast to mean type convert
>in general.

I don't think it is a big thing, and can live with calling it a cast
library, but...

> (Ironically "convert" happens to not show up among the 45
>widely varied meanings of "cast" listed in my dictionary.) :-)

Exactly. "Conversion" is clearer than "cast" in terms of general English


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at