David Abrahams wrote:
Tobias Schwinger <tschwinger@neoscientists.org> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Tobias Schwinger <tschwinger@neoscientists.org> writes:
The Function Type library uses tag types to represent a type's properties, such as its calling convention or whether it is variadic.
How do I make this valid English (plural tag types, singular type)?
It's fine as is.
Great!
I'd call this library "Function Types" (plural, like "Type Traits") but that that's just me.
Well, actually I prefer Function Types too (btw. the current draft contains a class template with the same name as the namespace)...
So - is our rationale good enough to violate the Boost guidelines at this point?
Which guideline are you proposing to violate? What rationale?
Which guideline? http://www.boost.org/more/lib_guide.htm#Naming%AD_consistency However, I just re-read it and "are usually singular" is less strict than what I had remembered, so "violate" might have been the wrong word. What rationale? - Consistency with Boost.TypeTraits - Avoid possible name conflict with a well-named component of the library itself Regards, Tobias