dan marsden wrote:
Ronald Garcia wrote:
* The library name "Fusion", though not arbitrary, says little about the library's purpose. There is precedent for this within boost, however. A name change is not mandatory for the library's acceptance, but it would be worth while for the authors to consider a more telling name.
I actually like the current name, as I also like the names Boost.Spirit and Boost.Xpressive as examples of other boost libs. In the absence of a natural name for the library such as the Boost Concept Library or the Boost Graph Library, I'd rather stick with the current name than change to some awkward acronym.
Of course if somebody has a good idea for natural sounding name, that would be cool, and may help new users identify the library as being suitable/unsuitable for their needs.
Fusion was originally intended to be a code name. Now, I find it very natural to refer to the library using that name. If anyone comes up with a good acronym, I'm still inclined to use Fusion and add the Acronym with it. Example: Boost.Fusion.TAL Tuples and Algorithms Library Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net