Re: [boost] [mpl] Metafunction terminology - revival?

From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-24 13:55:44

I whined:

> > It is a bit boring not to be able to use a common name for these 
> > constructs, especially when trying to tech others about 
> > metaprogramming techniques in
> > C++. And I do not see such common names in the MPL 
> documentation (or 
> > C++book.)

David Abrahams responded:

> Yeah, we managed to write the whole book without such a name, 
> which suggests maybe it isn't really needed.

That is true for experienced folks, but seems to break down when teaching
this subject to more junior colleagues.

So, I will use "metafunctor" and "metafunctoid" till further notice (in the
form of a revision of the MPL documentation) ;-)

"Yes, just create a metafunctor, whichever way you like - lambda,
explicitly... - and use it!"

/David