Dave Abrahams wrote
on Mon Jan 16 2012, Lorenzo Caminiti <lorcaminiti-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Thomas Klimpel <Thomas.Klimpel@> wrote:
Hartmut Kaiser wrote:
On 01/02/2012 10:25 AM, Lorenzo Caminiti wrote:
Hello all,
Boost.Closure (formerly, Boost.Local) needs to use some macros,
types,
etc that are currently marked private in Boost.ScopeExit:
Boost.Closure? I really don't like that name is at implies functional programming capabilities. Didn't you decide to name it Boost.LocalFunction instead?
I second that concern. I wouldn't like for the local function library to claim the name 'closure'. This would be
a) totally misleading and b) inhibits to give that name to a potential real closure library in the future.
+1
As I said before, I'm equally happy with Boost.LocalFunction and Boost.Closure. I'm checking with my review manager about going back from Closure to LocalFunction given that a few people have now expressed such a preference. I'll keep everyone posted :)
Given that C++ is not, and will never be, a language where everything is GC'd, I think the name "Closure" is not too much of a stretch.
I'm happy to inform that I confirmed with my review manager that everyone considers Boost.LocalFunction an acceptable name so I'm going back from Boost.Closure to Boost.LocalFunction.
I'd like to know what features people think a "real" closure library should have in C++. If that set of features is actually implementable, maybe it makes sense to reserve the name. Otherwise, I'm not so sure.
I still would like to second this request (regardless of the library name, I might be able to make local functions support the features if we have such a list, for now C++11 lambda closure definition has been my benchmark). In other words, reiterating a question I asked before in this thread (but got no answer to): lcaminiti wrote
Thomas Heller-7 wrote
On 01/02/2012 10:25 AM, Lorenzo Caminiti wrote:
I really don't like that name is at implies functional programming capabilities.
For example, I programmed all the examples from the link* above using my library. Is there an example of what you'd expect to do with a C++ closure that cannot instead be programmed with my library?
(*) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_(computer_science) Thanks a lot, --Lorenzo -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/local-name-was-Re-protected-APIs-tp429954... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.