From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-24 16:09:20
"Joel de Guzman" <joel_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Andy Little wrote:
>> "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
>>>> 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.
>> And BTW its pretty public in the 'make your own iterator" part of the docs.
> Yeah. That's unfortunate. I asked Dan to fix it. Anyway, I suggest you
> do the right thing: specialize tag_of.
AFAICS specialising tag_of don't seem to work with current CVS. I seem to need
to put the intrusive fusion_tag F*tag in, then things work OK.
Also should I be specialising category_of or using a category F*tag ?