Re: [boost] [function types] New tag type logic

28 Jun 2005

      David Abrahams wrote:
...
Tobias Schwinger <tschwinger@neoscientists.org> writes:
...
David Abrahams wrote:
True for the second version, for the first (and the latest, parallel to you post 
in this thread) there is "one aspect" in the preceding sentence. Is it too far away?
Well, it appears visually to be in a separate paragraph, so yes.
Ah, good point! I'll remove the line break.
...
...
...
Also, the text there beginning with "In other words," and ending with
a period is not a complete sentence.
Will it become a valid subordinate clause if we change the period before it to a dash?
In a whole:
When classifying types, it is often necessary to match against
     several possibilities of one aspect.
     The most important case is to match all of them -- in other words:
     to ignore that aspect. The tags named "unspecified_" plus the aspect
     name describe these cases.
Does this work?
Better.  Does this documentation really define what a "possibility of
an aspect" is?  If not, you had better do so, or better yet, pick more
understandable and evocative terminology.
I'll use the term "variation" instead of "possibility" (as just proposed by Rob 
Stewart):

     Tag types:
     ----------

( changes: "variations of" inserted, corrected misplaced "(see reference)" )

     The kinds of a type to be synthesised and complex classification queries are
     described by *tag* types.

     A tag encapsulates one or more aspects of the kind of type.

     Tags which only encapsulate variations of a single aspect are called
     *aspect tags* in the following text (see reference).

                                               ^^^
                                             links to:

     Aspect tags:
     ------------

      // - decoration aspect
      typedef /.../ unspecified_decoration; // (*) (default)
      typedef /.../ unbound; // (*) (matches the next three)
      typedef /.../ undecorated;
      typedef /.../ pointer;
      typedef /.../ reference;
      typedef /.../ member_pointer;
      // (*) abstract - same as 'undecorated' when used for synthesis

      // - variadic aspect
      typedef /.../ unspecified_variadic; // (*) (default)
      typedef /.../ non_variadic;
      typedef /.../ variadic;
      // (*) abstract - same as 'non_variadic' when used for synthesis
      ...

Does it work?!

Thanks,

Tobias