On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Arthur O'Dwyer via cfe-commits <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Following Louis' suggestion, how about __pack_nth?
>>
>
> Maybe just __pack_element, to mirror its intended use to implement things
> like tuple_element? (I'm not completely happy about using this general name
> for something that only works for packs of types, but given that this
> template produces a type, it's probably the best we can do.)
>

That seems fine to me. I do feel like a name for something else will be
shoehorned in later as well though.

Louis - what do you think?


>
>
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Nathan Wilson via cfe-commits <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 4:52 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Nathan Wilson <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> nwilson added a comment.
>>>>>
>>>>> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D15421#326144, @rsmith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Bikeshedding on the name a bit... how about `__type_pack_element`?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm, I kind of felt like having `nth` in there implied we're indexing
>>>>> into something... What about `__nth_pack_element`?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Conversely, std::nth_element doesn't do indexing, and
>>>> std::tuple_element does.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, I was trying to combine them, but maybe that's misleading.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cfe-commits mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-commits mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to