Re: [boost] Re: typelists: MPL tutorial + partial review

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-12-12 13:45:20

From: "Dave Gomboc" <dave_at_[hidden]>
> I also agree with the comments about naming regarding "IndexOf" should
> be "at", and so forth.  I imagine it will be a long, long time before I
> stop thinking of "for_each" as anything other than "map" (from
> Haskell/Miranda), but "for_each" is already the C++ term for it in the
> STL, and that's not up for renaming. :-)  Metaprogramming is still
> programming!, and consistency is important, so call it for_each
> everywhere, irregardless of whether it's happening at compile-time or
> run-time.

But for_each is not map, AFAIK. for_each can change the sequence it's
applied to. Functional languages don't. Even transform is not map.

--
Peter Dimov
Multi Media Ltd.