RE: [boost] Re: Formal Review: Template Metaprogramming Library ( MPL)

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-24 04:03:41

Peter Dimov wrote:
> > > What are meta_fun[1|2]? It is the first time you mention them.
> >
> > The templates that convert metafunctions of given arity 
> > into metafunction classes.
> 
> I kind of like Mat Marcus' 'quote' terminology, where 
> metafunction classes are called 'quoted metafunctions', and 
> meta_fun[N] is spelled quote[N]. Have you considered it?

Considering now :). Glad you've suggested an alternative, because I am not
happy with 'meta_fun'. As David has noted, it sounds like it's making a
metafunction, not a metafunction class; in that respect, I think that even
the previous 'make_f' spelling was better - at least it didn't misguide you.
I went with 'meta_fun' because I couldn't think of anything better, and I
was running out of time scheduled for the renaming task (I also considered
'to_mfc' or 'as_mfc' - where "mfc" stands for metafunction class, but that
one was quickly discarded for obvious reasons :).

In any case, I like "quote", although it's slightly out of the current
terminology (which I would be reluctant to change). If something even better
won't come up till the end of the review, I guess 'meta_fun' will be renamed
to 'quote'.

Aleksey