Joaquín Mª López Muñoz <joaquin@tid.es> writes:
David Abrahams ha escrito:
Cromwell Enage <sponage@yahoo.com> writes:
--- David Abrahams wrote:
Which categories should it go in?
Try "Containers" and/or "Miscellaneous".
How does it fit in "containers?"
I'd vote for "Generic Programming"
I fail to see what Boost.Parameter has to do with generic programming.
When you look at the Graph library, a generic programming tour de force, I think it becomes more apparent.
and "Miscellaneous." I think we should have a "Functional Programming" category and it should go in there, too.
Again, I don't see how the lib is related to functional programming.
The category I'm thinking of is not exactly "functional programming" so much as "building and using function interfaces." As I wrote, We have more components designed to operate on functions and function objects every day.
To me, Boost.Parameter sports a special kind of syntactic sugar, so I'd add an "Idioms" (or something like that) category grouping:
- parameter - base-from-member - utility - perhaps, compressed_pair
This looks like "misc" to me. I see no particular association among those. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com