Re: [boost] FC++ review

From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-01 20:33:47

Brian McNamara wrote:

>>"Functor" has for years been commonly used to mean "function object" (in
>>addition to its original meaning from category theory).
>>[http://www.dre.vanderbilt.edu/~bala/c++-function-objects.pdf;
>>http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/functors.html;
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functor].  Have no referees of your
>>academic publications brought this up?  There is no need to name anew
>>a common concept: therefore, s/functoid/functor globally!
> 
> 
> I don't recall this comment coming up from referees of the
> publications.  Note that, to the FP community, "functor" means
> something completely different from what it means in C++.
> 
> In any case, "functoids" as described in those papers were a "new
> concept" requiring a new name.  A "functoid" was a "functor" that also
> supported polymorphic return-type deduction.
> 
> This distinction is now becoming dated, though.  In any case, the
> overall point here (that the Boost documents on FC++ need to be
> tailored to a C++ audience, rather than an FP audience) is taken.  

A "signed functor" ??? :-)

-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net