Re: [boost] [Review] Boost.Type Traits Extension by Frederic Bron

Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Boost.Type Traits Extension by Frederic Bron
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-15 10:35:53

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
> On Behalf Of Thomas Klimpel
> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 11:41 AM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Boost.Type Traits Extension by Frederic Bron
> 
> Thomas Heller wrote:
> > WRT naming i think we should strive for consistent naming in overall
> > boost, not just the type_traits library. Proto, for example, names the
> > operators as well, as does Boost.Operator.
> The following list of names from Proto looks quite good to me, and doesn't
> seem to contain any "odd sounding" names like "operator_plus_equal"
> 
> <http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_46_1/doc/html/proto/users_guide.html#bo
> ost_proto.users_guide.intermediate_form.tags_and_metafunctions>

There would seem to me to be a very strong case for having the same names as
in Boost.Proto and Boost.Operator.

Paul

PS It is a bit disappointing not to have the icons and /images etc from the
html

and not to have a PDF version too?  (The reference to the 'Printer friendly
PDF' is to the current 'old' version).

But I am sure this can be fixed eventually.

---
Paul A. Bristow,
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal LA8 8AB  UK
[phone]  07714330204
pbristow_at_[hidden]