Dear Frédéric, Operatorists, list, on occasion of the current naming discussion on operator traits I started a wiki page with an operator functor naming table that allows for an overview over names of operators, functors (and related concept names) across the standard and boost. I compared the name stems only, independent of the question of a 'has_' or 'has_operator_' prefix. Basically it's an extension of Frédéric's operator names table 1.7 from his docs, extended by proto and boost::operator names. Comparing the names I tried to find "Most Unifying Proposals" for names in column MUP: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/Guidelines/Naming/Operators Also I took a look at the current and new standard's functor class templates from header <functional>. I wonder why all the functors only use one template parameter, which restricts their use leaving out the interesting cases of functors for mixed type overloaded operators. template <class T> struct op_functor { ... } instead of template <class T, class U=T, class R=T> struct op_functor { ... } Also I don't understand, why inheritence form binary_function<T,U,R> is no longer declared, but instead of this, the redundant declaration of all associated types for every functor. Does this codereplication serve any purpose? Regards, Joachim -- Interval Container Library [Boost.Icl] http://www.joachim-faulhaber.de