From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-24 13:55:44
I whined:
> > It is a bit boring not to be able to use a common name for these
> > constructs, especially when trying to tech others about
> > metaprogramming techniques in
> > C++. And I do not see such common names in the MPL
> documentation (or
> > C++book.)
David Abrahams responded:
> Yeah, we managed to write the whole book without such a name,
> which suggests maybe it isn't really needed.
That is true for experienced folks, but seems to break down when teaching
this subject to more junior colleagues.
So, I will use "metafunctor" and "metafunctoid" till further notice (in the
form of a revision of the MPL documentation) ;-)
"Yes, just create a metafunctor, whichever way you like - lambda,
explicitly... - and use it!"
/David