Re: [boost] "protected" APIs

Subject: Re: [boost] "protected" APIs
From: Thomas Klimpel (Thomas.Klimpel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-01-16 06:06:57

Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
> > 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

Or more precisely, just ignoring mails questioning the name Boost.Closure is not good style. In a functional programming language, many things can be done with a closure (for example returning it from a function), and it is unclear to me, whether Boost.Local really is able to approximate this functionality in a sufficiently usable way. It might be true, but then please point me to the corresponding passage in the documentation.

Regards,
Thomas