Re: [Boost-users] is_foo_type naming rule

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] is_foo_type naming rule
From: Niitsuma Hirotaka (hirotaka.niitsuma_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-03-09 01:05:34

If
boost::type_traits
includes the following converter from compile-time to run-time
"is_foo" , we don't need consider  such naming problem

>> Are there any standard naming rule distinguish these functor?
>
> I don't think so, but reasonable alternatives are:
> - Name them the same thing (union the above definitions).
> - Name the structs the same, but put them in different namespaces (e.g., mpl
> and functional).
> - Name them static_foo and foo (this is the convention used by Boost.Math, I
> think, for integer functions).
>
>> is_foo_runtime
>> is_foo_compiletime ?
>>
>>
>>
>> The compile-time functor can convert to runtime factor using :
>>
>> ---------
>> template<typename IsTemplateMplLambda>
>> struct  is_templated_type_to_runtime
>> {
>>   typedef
>>     struct is_templated_type_runtime {
>>     template<typename T>
>>     bool operator()(T)
>>     {
>>       return boost::mpl::apply<IsTemplateMplLambda,T>::type::value;
>>     }
>>   } type;
>> };
>
>
> Oh, so then what do you need the runtime foo one for? :)

When

- getting at(N) from boost.fusion.list<T1,T2,T3....>

 type information need in run-time :T_N