Boost logo

Boost :

From: Mat Marcus (mmarcus_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-25 11:32:37

Dave Abrahams writes
> Those are worse on all counts AFAICT. It's neither an object
> nor a value. How does that help the user?

Maybe it was kind of a stretch, but the reasoning went like
this. I was thinking of MPL as a programming language with
functions and values (or objects). The functions happen to be
struct templates from another language, C++, and the values
happen to be types and enums from C++. In the MPL language
functions can be passed and returned as values, but special
care is needed. So the terms metafunction value or metafunction
object were meant to indicate metafunction passed/returned as
an object/value.

Anyway never mind all of this. I don't really like these names
that much, I was just trying to suggest alternatives since
nobody else (with the exception of Peter Dimov) seemed to like
"quoted metafunction". When learning MPL (before your fine
paper was written) my breakthrough came when I realized the
analogy with lisp. I still think quoted metafunction is a much
better name. Perhaps I've beaten this one into the ground

 - Mat

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at