Re: [boost] [naming] standard: bitwise operations in the new standard (20.8.7)

Subject: Re: [boost] [naming] standard: bitwise operations in the new standard (20.8.7)
From: Gevorg Voskanyan (v_gevorg_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-04-30 09:00:03

Howard Hinnant wrote:

> On Apr 29, 2011, at 7:53 AM, Christopher Jefferson wrote:
> >  On 29 Apr 2011, at 12:37, Joachim Faulhaber wrote:
> >> Dear  list,
> >> 
> >> this posting is addressed specifically to those  people who are
> >> involved in the standardisation process for c++. As  far as I know
> >> 
> >> Beman, Howard, Dave, Doug,  ...
> >> 
> >> On occasion of the Boost.TypeTraits extension we  were discussing names
> >> for operators and operator call traits. As an  important aspect, naming
> >> consistency with the standard and across  boost libraries has been
> >> discussed.
> > 
> > Unfortunately,  you are a couple of months too late, the final version of the 
>standard has been  completed. You could submit a defect report, but I shouldn't 
>think something  would be renamed under a defect report, unless there was a good 
>reason for doing  so, and being compatible with boost probably isn't a good 
>enough reason.
> > 
> > bit_and and friends have been in g++ since 2007, so it's really too  late to 
>be changing the name now.
> > 
> > Sorry,
> > 
> >  Chris
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> Howard

[snip]

> >> // 20.8.7, bitwise operations:
> >> template <class T> struct bit_and;
> >> template <class T> struct bit_or;
> >> template <class T> struct bit_xor;
> >>
> >> Since 20.8.7, bitwise operations  are *new* in the standard and naming
> >> consistency would be great for  users, do you think there is a chance
> >> that those 3 names can be  changed to
> >> 
> >> bitwise_and, bitwise_or, bitwise_xor  ?

As a matter of fact, 'bitand' and 'bitor' have been alternative tokens for & and 
| since at least C++98. I.e. still no "bitwise" in the name.

[snip]

> >> Best  regards,
> >> Joachim

Best Regards,
Gevorg