Re: [boost] Alternative names to Boost.Fit

Subject: Re: [boost] Alternative names to Boost.Fit
From: Paul Fultz II (pfultz2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-03-05 11:25:07

On Saturday, March 5, 2016 at 8:50:54 AM UTC-6, Robert Ramey wrote:
>
> On 3/2/16 6:48 AM, paul Fultz wrote: 
> > Hello All, 
> > 
> > Boost.Fit is a function utility library, however, the name currently 
> doesn't 
> > have anything with this. I originally chose the name because it started 
> with 
> > F(for function) and it was short and sounded nice. However, there could 
> be 
> > some names(or abbreviations) that more adequately describe the library. 
> Here 
> > are some alternatives that are short: 
> > 
> > - Boost.FP 
> > - Boost.FPL 
> > - Boost.Fun 
> > - Boost.FN 
> > 
> > Of course, I prefer the Boost.FN name. Names like Boost.FP or Boost.FPL 
> could 
> > imply that it provides full functional constructs whereas Boost.Fit does 
> not 
> > and is mainly focused on functions. 
> > 
> > Either way, this is something reviewers could consider as they review 
> the 
> > library as I am not strongly tied to the name Boost.Fit. 
> > 
> > Thanks, 
> > Paul 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > Unsubscribe & other changes: 
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost 
> > 
>
> Personally, I'm not too crazy about abbreviations.  And I'm not too 
> crazy about "cute" names either - spirit, hana, etc.  So it was up to me 
> I'd live with "FunctionUtilities" or "FunctionObjects". 
>
> Shortening the name creates confusion, makes code less readable.  Since 
> most of the library is defined inside the namespace, it doesn't really 
> add any typing.  In those cases where the typing does get long, one can 
> at a (local) alias. 
>

However, you can't namespace alias a macro though.