Re: [boost] [function types] Name changes / synopsis

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-27 07:01:54

> Synopsis:

Mostly look good to me!

> namespace boost
> {
>   namespace function_type
>   {
>     // Result: bool, Concept: MPL-Integral Constant
>     template<typename T, typename QueryTag = undecorated>
>     struct is_function_;

I don't like the trailing underscore much, but I see why it's there :-)

On the other hand, since we're in a separate namespace from type_traits we 
could just drop the underscore... might lead to confusion though.  Come to 
that having the underscore will lead to confusion as well IMO.

I understand why you dropped the trailing "_type" suffix, but 
"is_function_type" was the only obvious alternative I could think of.

Hmmm, how about "is_function_kind" ?  Not pretty, but it kind of sums up 
what the meta-function does.

Any other ideas anyone?

>
>     // Result: bool, Concept: MPL-Integral Constant
>     template<typename T> struct is_function_pointer;
>     template<typename T> struct is_function_reference;
>     template<typename T> struct is_member_function_pointer_;

I think the trailing underscore has to go from there as well IMO.  Ideally 
this one and the type traits one should be the same template.  They have the 
same semantics don't they?

While we're at it, can the traits inherit from 
boost::integral_constant<bool, true/false> please?  They will still be MPL 
friendly, and they'll follow the type_traits and TR1 conceptual framework as 
well then.

The rest of the synopsis looks good to me.

John.