On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:23 AM, Edward Diener <eldiener@tropicsoft.com>wrote:
On 7/18/2011 10:27 PM, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
[...]
I also don't think the *name* MEMBER_TYPE / member_type_xxx really
conveys
well what this macro / metafunction combination does; I don't have any alternatives at the moment.
Actually, I'm not finding it so bad anymore. But you might do well putting it into its own separate section in the documentation.
It is documented separately from the HAS_ macro metafunctions and from their equivalent nullary type metafunctions.
Evidently I'm not using the correct quickbook or boostbook terminology for the various hierarchical constructs in documentation, but I meant as a separate *top-level* section, separate from the section summarizing the metafunction-generating macros BOOST_TTI_HAS_. I'm probably nit-picking at this point. But it might insulate those users from going through too much information if all they want to do is simple top-level introspection queries. I know when I was going through the documentation, MEMBER_TYPE / member_type_ seemed like lost and forlorn children after the big table of HAS_ / has_. Just a thought. - Jeff