Re: [boost] [fusion] ftag

From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-22 20:10:25

"Joel de Guzman" <joel_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:ef1t83$bhv$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
> Andy Little wrote:
>> "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> news:87fyenkjh9.fsf_at_pereiro.luannocracy.com...
>>> AFAICT the name ftag should be changed to something more descriptive
>>> and more certainly unique, e.g. boost_fusion_iterator_tag.  Is there
>>> a reason it needs to be so short?
>>
>> Why make such a trivial  change to the  interface post review? AFAICS now is 
>> too
>> late, and will cause unnecessary pain to users.. like myself.
>
> Well, actually, it shouldn't be a part of the interface.
> Here, I'm used to calling it the f#%$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.

regards
Andy Little