From: Jaakko Järvi (jarvi_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-05 22:46:38
On Jun 5, 2006, at 9:09 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
> dan marsden <danmarsden_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> Of course if somebody has a good idea for natural sounding name,
>> that would be cool, and may
>> help new users identify the library as being suitable/unsuitable
>> for their needs.
> tuples (it's supposed to replace boost.tuple eventually, right?)
Hmm... That is really what fusion to a large extent is.
(Old) tuples are mainly a tuple data structure, Fusion is a tuple
data-structure (possibly many of them),
the definition of the interfaces of any tuple-like data-structure,
and routines that use this interface
for manipulating tuples (or tuple-like data-structures)
And yes, fusion should replace boost.tuple.
If Boost.Tuple is the baseline of tuples, Fusion could be viewed as
"tuples on steroids"
If Fusion is the baseline of tuples, Boost.Tuple could be viewed as
"poor man's tuples"
So tuple could be a descriptive name --- using it requires that the
"switchover" gets done of course.
> metatuple (if you need something sexy)
> Dave Abrahams
> Boost Consulting
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk