Matthias Kaeppler wrote:
Are those two function templates also defined in call_traits.hpp? I can't find them in the library docs.
type_traits.hpp -- found it :) Alright, based on your valuable input, I have come up with this (those template meta programming facilities of boost are /amazing/!): template< typename Operation > class indirecter_unary { typedef typename boost::unary_traits<Operation>::argument_type arg_type; typedef typename boost::unary_traits<Operation>::param_type param_type; typedef typename boost::unary_traits<Operation>::result_type result_type; typedef typename boost::unary_traits<Operation>::function_type function_type; typedef typename boost::remove_reference<typename boost::add_const<arg_type>::type>::type* ptr_type; function_type op_; public: explicit indirecter_unary( param_type op ): op_(op) {} result_type operator() (ptr_type ptr) const { return op_(*ptr); } }; Anything else coming to your mind what could be bad about this adaptor? I want it to be as robust as possible because I intend to use it a lot. By the way (silly question): Is it 'indirecter' or 'indirector'? I wasn't quite sure. Don't want to have typos in my classnames :) Regards, Matthias -- Matthias Kaeppler