Re: [boost] Submission: typelist

From: David A. Greene (greened_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-28 17:05:58

Kevin Cline wrote:

> FWIW, I like the original names too.  "int2type" is perfectly clear;

Better than int_t for the operation known as "unique type" IMHO.
But mpl uses int_t for other things as well.  If all we're talking
about is usage _a_la_ MC++D, why not "unique_type?"  I proposed
this in another thread, but no one seemed interested.  Perhaps
it's a little too generic.  unique_type<isPolymorphic> looks
a little strange.  :)

> "type2type" is perhaps not as obvious, but it's a better name than
> anything else proposed so far.

dispatch_type?  That's indicating a rather specific usage.  I
kind of like type_wrapper myself.  It's a kind of indirection.
type2type<...>::type is the "dereference" operation.  Should
that somehow play into the name?

                             -Dave

-- 
"Some little people have music in them, but Fats, he was all music,
  and you know how big he was."  --  James P. Johnson