Boost logo

Boost :

From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-12-23 19:56:12

I think the notation for 'const', before or after the main type itself in a
type expression, should be consistent in all documentation. I admit I have
been swayed by the argument of Josuttis and Vandevoorde in their C++
Templates book to put it after the main type, since this follows the general
rule that 'const' always goes after the type it is modifying. In the call
traits documentation, it is sometimes before and sometimes after the main
type and, especially since call traits is about type conversion, I think it
should be consistent one way or another in the Example table. So for
instance, when the original type is myclass, both the const_reference and
the param_type should be either 'const myclass &' or 'myclass const &', with
my preference being the latter. Creating two different syntax notations for
the same type in the example, even if the categories of usage are different,
such as const_reference and param_type, seems to me just confusing.

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