[boost] adaptable_any vs any_with

From: Alexander Nasonov (alnsn-mycop_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-01 06:53:38

I'm asking for voting for the new name of dynamic_any. Please, give you 
preference.
Here is my discussion about the name with Kevlin Henney (>> and empty prefix 
- Kevlin, > - me)

--- cut ---
>> Have you had any more thoughts on an alternative name? Something like
>> adaptable_any or extensible_any?

>I really don't like the current name and I don't like the fact that  
> namespace has different name.
>If I understand meaning of the word, extensible_any is not a right name 
>because when you extend operation list you narrow a set of supported types. 

Good point! reducible_any ;-)

>Sometimes this set can be so narrow that I doubt about 'any' in name! 
>adaptable_any is much better. I like it.

It seemed to be the best of the rest.

Another thought might be to take advantage of the way you might read
what is written. Instead of naming the operation list operation_list,
name it io_operations. Instead of dynamic_any, or even adaptable_any,
use the name any_with. This would give you any_with<io_operations>,
which reads as a perfectly accurate description in English.

Kevlin

--- end of cut ---

-- 
Alexander Nasonov
Remove minus and all between minus and at from my e-mail for timely response