From: joel de guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-28 19:18:19
----- Original Message -----
From: "joel de guzman" :
> > I fear these will engender confusion because they are similar to size_t
> > ptrdiff_t, types that don't have a generic programming conotation. So
> > someone seeing int_t might think "hmmm, this must be some platform
> > integral type..."
> I don't know much about loki nor mpl. I do have a metaprogramming library
> that uses functional techniques such as currying and list processing, not
> unlike mpl. I too have an int_t facility. Here's how I bind arguments:
> add<int_t<1>, int_t<2> > --> direct, both args supplied
> add<int_t<2>, _> --> 2nd arg, curry
> add<_, int_t<2> > --> 1st arg, curry
> add<_, _> --> both args, curry
> Now imagine if I use int2type instead.... That's why I tend to
> agree with mpl's this time.
In fact, in my -yet-another-list-implementation-, I used int_, bool_,
char_, opting for the shortest possible name. IMO, in its domain
these are the primitive types. I am not at all concerned about
confusion since it is in its own namespace and I assume that
clients of the library read the documentation (if any).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk