RE: [boost] Ready to add dlw_oprs.zip?

From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-18 14:07:52

Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:

 >1) it might sound as nit-picking, but there is a difference 
between  'class
 >templates' and 'template classes' terms, and IMO the following (first)
 >sentence of the documentation should really use the former term ('class
 >templates'): "The header <boost/operators.hpp> supplies several sets of
 >template classes (in namespace boost)." BTW, some other boost libraries'
 >docs (e.g. one of type_traits), also use the 'template classes' phrase in
 >(IMO) wrong contexts...

Don't feel alone on this one - the standard made the same mistake, and so 
there is a defect report changing dozens of "template class" -> "class 
template" and "template function" -> "function template".

 >One last meta comment: I am also sharing Dave's concerns about library's
 >grow (given that just recently I citied the library as an example of
 >appropriate layering/splitting into parts :). I think that splitting it 
to
 >at least three parts (both code and documentation) - basic arithmetic
 >operators, iterator adapters and grouped operators, should be done before
 >the release. If nobody else, I'll volunteer :).

If you do make this change, please try to figure out a way to resolve 
potential confusion between these "iterator adapters" and the "iterator 
adaptors" now being formally reviewed.  Seems like they might be combined, 
but I haven't studied that issue closely.

Damn! I just check the boost HTML pages and the C++ Standard.  The Standard 
spells it "adaptor" but we spell it "adapter" in a bunch of places.  Either 
is correct according to my dictionary.  I think we should standardize on 
"adaptor" to follow the C++ Standard.  (The only actual header code where 
we spell it with an 'e' is random.hpp: generator_iterator_mixin_adapter. )

--Beman