From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-09 10:18:39
"Terje Slettebø" <tslettebo_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> >From: "John Maddock" <john_at_[hidden]>
> Me too.
> > BTW, don't get too hung up on names it could be a bicycle shed issue
> > :-)
> Don't worry; we have, after all, working code, and the naming issue is not
> what is most important.
FWIW I have been reading the previous discussion and found the function
style filters , whatever v. interesting, but Possibly like others I havent
really got any constructive suggestions.... I am just voyuerising. Most
important thing seems to be the pragmatic one... compile times, and that the
mechanisms involved in the library may turn out to be as useful as the end
result. The big question (Which I hope will be dicussed at the next big C++
meeting?) is what will compiler authors make of Concepts with a big C. IOW
Are they ever going to be practical. (It seems that decltype, which IMO
Everyone wants, too may need similar heavyweight speculative
instantiation,backout etc.) The library here certainly has some flavour of
something to focus those discussions on.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk