Larry Evans writes:
In this thread, there's frequent mention of domains, and groups of related types and transformations between domains. Thes phrases remind me of proto's transformations:
http://boost-sandbox.sourceforge.net/libs/proto/doc/html/boost_proto/users_g...
is there any chance proto could be used?
Yes, there probably is. As you probably guessed, I'm using MPL stuff to do some of the type deduction. I'm not certain that I'm up for Proto just yet, but that may be a promising path to consider. Currently, I'm thinking that would end up being an implementation detail so some of the issues could be worked out first and then perhaps improved upon by using Proto. Thoughts?
Also, the mention of common set of types and transformations reminds me of algebras and transformations between those algebras.
Yes, it would seem to have a lot of similarities. Indeed, qualitatively I have some of the same thoughts. However, I have not mapped my ideas into that formal mathematical domain very carefully, yet. I agree completely that if there is a good mapping, I should be using that language for at least one level of the discussion. At the same time, that language, while precise, is pretty abstract. Thus, I have opted to start with more practical descriptions. I'll give this more careful thought, though. Thanks. Cheers, Brook