Re: [boost] [function types] New tag type logic

From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-28 14:50:33

From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
> Rob Stewart <stewart_at_[hidden]> writes:
> >
> >> There is no singular thing for "that" to refer to here. =20
> >
> > The antecedent is missing.  Sorry about that.  s/that/an/
> 
> That doesn't help.  Then I have to ask "which aspect?"  I can't
> connect "matching all possibilities" with "ignoring an aspect."

Tough crowd. 8^}

> >> Also, the text there beginning with "In other words," and ending with
> >> a period is not a complete sentence.
> >
> > Yeah, you're right, but I doubt that hindered your
> > understanding. =20
> 
> When it's already confusing, a fragment like that one doesn't help.=8E=AC=

How's this:

   When classifying types, it is often necessary to test for any
   one of several variations of an aspect.  A common case is
   ignoring an aspect which means to allow a match for any
   variation of that aspect and is only useful when also testing
   for other aspects.  Ignoring an aspect means using an
   "unspecified_*" tag.  For example, allowing a match for any
   decoration requires using the <tt>unspecified_decoration</tt>
   tag.

I changed from "the most important" to "a common" because I
suspect that's more appropriate.

-- 
Rob Stewart                           stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer                     http://www.sig.com
Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;