Re: [boost] [Review] Type Traits Extension by Frederic Bron - Review summary and decision

Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Type Traits Extension by Frederic Bron - Review summary and decision
From: Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. (jeffrey.hellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-27 18:07:17

2011/3/27 Frédéric Bron <frederic.bron_at_[hidden]>

> >  - The main recurring suggestions found was the choice of name for the
> > operator traits with respect to the standard naming, naming in proto and
> > other boost libraries.
> >  * Frederic and a few other seems to favor the proto naming scheme (more
> or
> > less the negate issue and the pre/post operator)
> >  * the question of a common prefix is still open
>
> What about is_callable_plus, is_callable_plus_assign, ...
> i.e. is_callable_xxxx where xxxx the same as in Boost.Proto?
>
> I know that is_xxxx_callable reads better but I like to have a common
> prefix longer than is_.
>

I think this is worse than has_operator_xxx or is_xxxable.

- Jeff