Re: [boost] Alternative names to Boost.Fit

Subject: Re: [boost] Alternative names to Boost.Fit
From: paul Fultz (pfultz2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-03-05 14:56:47

> On Saturday, March 5, 2016 1:29 PM, Rob Stewart <rstewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > On March 5, 2016 1:20:27 PM EST, paul Fultz <pfultz2_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> 
>> - Boost.FU
> 
> This one is both a problem and a fun name. As an acronym, it's a problem. I 
> won't explain that further. If it were spelled "Fu", it would be 
> like "Google Fu" and all of the other variations of kung fu. 
> Unfortunately, that meaning disqualifies this option for your library, too, 

> since "Boost Fu" would be generic to skill in using Boost libraries.
> 

Yes, Boost.FU would not be my preferred choice. Perhaps, Boost.FUL would be better(but it looks to me like the first three letters of my last name). Ideally, I was preferring Boost.Fn. This is a library for functions. So ideally, I would like it to be called function or functions, but that name has already been taken by "any_function"(AKA boost::function). This is why I was leaning towards an abbreviation of function instead(ie Fn).

With longer names, I would prefer acronyms:

* Boost.FL - Function Library
* Boost.FUL - Function Utility Library
* Boost.HOF - Higher-order Functions
* Boost.FCL - Function Combinator Library

* Boost.PEF(my initials) - Programming Enhancements for Functions

For simple short names, there is:

* Boost.Combinator - however, the library is more than combinators

* Boost.Curry - the library is more than currying.

My preferred choice:

* Boost.Fn - A library for functions

>