Re: [boost] Thoughts on Tokenizer

From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-03 10:31:14

Actually, we did think about that. At least I thought about it, and I'm
pretty sure I remember discussing it with Jeremy. And, I'm fairly certain,
C&E had already set a precedent for the term "generator" used this way. We
made the distinction between "object" generators and "type" generators, thus
clearly distinguishing the two analogous uses of the term. See
http://www.boost.org/more/generic_programming.html for details.

-Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Siek" <jsiek_at_[hidden]>

> His use of the term "generator" is inherited from the iterator adaptor
> library. We decided to use that name for type generators. Yes, it is
> unfortunate that we didn't think about the name conflict with the function
> object usage, but it's probably a bit late to go back and change that now.
>
> As for the mixed metaphors... I bet those other types are suppose to be
> private, not public.
>
> Cheers,
> Jeremy
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Jeremy Siek                        www: http://www.lsc.nd.edu/~jsiek/
>  Ph.D. Candidate, IU B'ton          email: jsiek_at_[hidden]
>  Summer Manager, AT&T Research      phone: [phone]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send email to: <mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>