Re: [boost] review request: addition to type_traits library ofhas_operator_xxx

Subject: Re: [boost] review request: addition to type_traits library ofhas_operator_xxx
From: Frédéric Bron (frederic.bron_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-20 10:48:37

>> * I'm not that keen on the operators:: subnamespace, to me that
>> namespace is reserved for the operators library
>> http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_45_0/libs/utility/operators.htm it would
>> have to be boost::type_traits::operators I guess which is rather less
>> cute :-(
>
> I forgot about this when I made my suggestion. I myself would not find
> boost::type_traits::operators to be too onerous, since after all one could
> alias the namespace as one likes, but I am a much stronger proponent of
> clarity in reading code than how much I have to type and many others seem to
> find important how many letters they have to type to use something in their
> code.

So how do we decide for one or the other solution. What would be the
way to decide?
As far as I am concerned, I have no strong opinion. The namespace
solution looks clearer but I like short typing too...
Do we need to organize sort of a vote?
Frédéric