Subject: Re: [boost] "protected" APIs
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-01-15 12:14:46
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Hartmut
> Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 3:51 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] "protected" APIs
> > On 01/02/2012 10:25 AM, Lorenzo Caminiti wrote:
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > Boost.Closure (formerly, Boost.Local) needs to use some macros,
> > > types, etc that are currently marked private in Boost.ScopeExit:
> > Boost.Closure? I really don't like that name is at implies functional
> > programming capabilities. Didn't you decide to name it
> > Boost.LocalFunction instead?
> I second that concern. I wouldn't like for the local function library to claim the name 'closure'.
> This would be
> a) totally misleading and
> b) inhibits to give that name to a potential real closure library in the future.
+1 - objection - Violent!!! ;-)
to Boost.Closure - despite some rationale.
Boost.LocalFunction is better.
--- Paul A. Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal LA8 8AB UK +44 1539 561830 07714330204 pbristow_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk