24 Jul
2006
24 Jul
'06
5:48 p.m.
"David Bergman" <David.Bergman@bergmangupta.com> writes:
I suggest that we call anything applicable via mpl::apply a "metafunctor." And have "metafunctoid" denote that category extended with #1 - ordinary metafunctions - above.
No strong objection
It is a bit boring not to be able to use a common name for these constructs, especially when trying to tech others about metaprogramming techniques in C++. And I do not see such common names in the MPL documentation (or book.)
Yeah, we managed to write the whole book without such a name, which suggests maybe it isn't really needed. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com