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

Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Boost.Type Traits Extension by Frederic Bron
From: Joel Falcou (joel.falcou_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-16 08:14:49

On 16/03/11 13:11, Stewart, Robert wrote:
> I generally like the names from Proto.  Consistency would be nice, but consider the names as they are likely to be standardized.  Better to get the names "right" now.  For example, I think "postfix_increment" is a likely name for standardization, while "post_inc" is not.

I guess some typedef could be done so we have a consistent proto list of 
operator's name. I found myself stumbling upon unary_minus vs negate a 
lot of time, especially because for me negate is always this strange 
libm binary function that transfer sign of a over b.

Renaming them in proto may break code I guess, but i dont think adding a 
typedef do any harm. Eric ?