[boost] Re: Ref documenation point of clarity

From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-23 20:12:48

David Abrahams wrote:
> "Edward Diener" <eddielee_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>> "Edward Diener" <eddielee_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>
>>>> This may be seen as a nitpick by I think the generalized one-line
>>>> explanation for 'ref', as well as the text in the 'ref'
>>>> introduction should say "passing reference parameters to generic
>>>> functions" rather than "passing references to generic functions".
>>>
>>> If I was going to add a word there, it would be "arguments," not
>>> "parameters."
>>
>> I have never seen a good explanation of the difference between
>> "parameters" or "arguments" when passing data to functions, but
>> "arguments" seems equally as good. I just felt that the term
>> "references to generic functions" does sound confusing since
>> references must refer to something and the terminology makes it
>> sound like it refers to generic functions rather than the types of
>> data one passes to generic functions.
>
> FYI, I no longer understand where the source for those docs are, so
> someone else will have to make the change.

I can not do it since I am not allowed so hopefully someone else will pick
it up.