Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

From: joel de guzman (isis-tech_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-08 20:45:45

Next message: joel de guzman: "Re: [boost] Spirit C++ parser framework"
Previous message: Julian Smith: "Re: [boost] Spirit C++ parser framework"
In reply to: Bruce.Florman_at_[hidden]: "Re: boost::nil"
Next in thread: Gary Powell: "RE: [boost] boost::nil"

----- Original Message -----
From: <Bruce.Florman_at_[hidden]>

> If "nil" and "null" are too widely defined, how about "naught"?
>
> Or is there too much potential for humor in having a naught_t type?
>
> --Bruce

Gosh, I have to take out Spirit's 'nil' I didn't realize it is
so controversial. I kinda liked nil instead of null or NULL.

-- 'none' or even 'non' seems fine --

too much typing in 'naught' :-)

-Joel

Next message: joel de guzman: "Re: [boost] Spirit C++ parser framework"
Previous message: Julian Smith: "Re: [boost] Spirit C++ parser framework"
In reply to: Bruce.Florman_at_[hidden]: "Re: boost::nil"
Next in thread: Gary Powell: "RE: [boost] boost::nil"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk