On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Stewart, Robert <Robert.Stewart@sig.com>wrote:
Joachim Faulhaber wrote:
[...]
You are stressing a tiny technical point, while I'd like to look at the big picture.
I'm stressing that the purpose of the functors is to encapsulate the operation. The purpose of the traits is to determine whether the operation is applicable in a particular context. Since they do different things, have different semantic purposes, they don't need the same names.
FWIW, I agree with Joachim on this point. Since they both deal with builtin C++ operators (something in common), *it would be nice* if the part of the name referring to the operator (the common part) were the same (or a slightly varied). The semantic difference between the functor and the trait should, IMO, primarily be conveyed by the prefix or suffix or the particular variation on the "primary" operator name. Also, while we're on the topic of what *I* prefer: I still prefer "has_xxx". To me, it has an implicit association (to me, anyway) to the names of trait predicates; it has simplicity and brevity; and it has existing use in Boost.TypeTraits. I can sympathize with arguments against "has_xxx" / for "can_call_xxx", I just never thought they were convincing enough :/ The decision is ultimately Mr. Bron's, though, and I'm sure he's doing his best to try to please everyone :) My 2c, - Jeff