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: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-20 12:11:14

On 11/20/2010 10:48 AM, Frédéric Bron wrote:
>>> * 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?

It is ultimately your decision. No matter which way you decide there 
will always be people who will like it and those who will not.