From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-22 20:10:25
"Joel de Guzman" <joel_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Andy Little wrote:
>> "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>> AFAICT the name ftag should be changed to something more descriptive
>>> and more certainly unique, e.g. boost_fusion_iterator_tag. Is there
>>> a reason it needs to be so short?
>> Why make such a trivial change to the interface post review? AFAICS now is
>> late, and will cause unnecessary pain to users.. like myself.
> Well, actually, it shouldn't be a part of the interface.
> Here, I'm used to calling it the f#%$tag :) It's not supposed
> to be for public consumption, and I intend to enforce that.
> Either way, it's not a good name (especially for minors. ;)
> and it must be changed.
Well... what about mpl integral_c::tag then? ought to be changed to something
more descriptive ASAP IMO.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk