Thanks so much for the help. A couple more questions: 1) Is it possible to add an enable parameter to is_actor in futureversions of phoenix? 2) Is the is_actor trait used internally by phoenix? The reason I ask is I am thinking about using my own is_actor trait for my extended actors unitl maybe this gets updated in boost. ----- Original Message -----
From: Thomas Heller <thom.heller@googlemail.com> To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Cc: Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 2:42 AM Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [phoenix] Extending actors
DISCLAIMER: All code was written without having been run through a compiler. It might or might compile. This is due to a missing testcase.
Hi all,
I am wanting to extend actors to access a member variable from the class. In the examples they show extending an acotr by using a lazy function to call the function. I was thinking I could use a lazy function to access the member, something
On 02/23/2012 01:57 AM, paul Fultz wrote: like this:
template<typename Expr> struct point_actor : actor<Expr> { typedef actor<Expr> base_type; typedef point_actor<Expr> that_type;
point_actor( base_type const& base ) : base_type( base ) {}
typename expression::function<x_impl, that_type>::type x; typename expression::function<y_impl, that_type>::type y;
};
The second template argument is the type for the first function argument. In the example it is *this. and passed to the expression in the member function. In your example, you would need to initialize x properly, maybe like that:
typedef expression::function<x_impl, that_type> x_expr; typedef expression::function<y_impl, that_type> y_expr;
point_actor(base_type const & base) : base_type(base) , x(x_expr::make(x_impl(), base)) , y(y_expr::make(y_impl(), base)) {}
Might actually work (NOTE: due to the PODness of the expression, we need to use the make function to create and initialize the expr properly!)
Where x_impl and y_impl are lazy functions that access the x and y variable. Would this work as member variables, rather than member functions? Also, why wouldnt the second parameter to expression::function take just actor instead of just point_actor<Expr>? Does that make sense? The reason I ask is I would like to control the actor that is returned and do something like this(using the above actor):
template<typename Expr> struct rect_actor : actor<Expr> { typedef actor<Expr> base_type; typedef rect_actor<Expr> that_type;
rect_actor( base_type const& base ) : base_type( base ) {}
typename expression::function<top_impl, point_actor>::type top; typename expression::function<bottom_impl, point_actor>::type bottom;
};
expression::terminal<phoenix::argument<1>, rect_actor> arg1; (cout<< arg1.top.x)(my_rect());
Now this gets interesting ;) To control the actor that gets returned, you have to implement some trickery! This is of course possible. Instead of:
typename expression::function<top_impl, point_actor>::type
You have to use your own expression type:
namespace expression { // This is for a function taking two arguments ... (The functor and // the argument to the functor) template <template <typename> Actor, typename A0, typename A1> struct custom_actor_function : boost::phoenix::expr_ext< Actor // This is the actor we would // like to get the expression // get wrapped in. , boost::phoenix::tag::function // This tag is important, this // tells proto that this // expression is a lazy function. , A0 , A1 > {}; }
now use it as follows:
typedef expression::custom_actor_function< rec_actor , top_impl , point_actor > top_fun_expr;
typename top_fun_expr::type const top() { return top_fun_expr::make(top_impl(), *this); }
This should let you write:
expression::terminal<phoenix::argument<1>, rect_actor> arg1; (cout<< arg1.top().x())(my_rect());
Does that make sense? I can't seem to find any reference on the predefined expressions, and I also can't find the header file for expression::function.
Shame on me ... the reference for the predefined expression is really rudimentary. I didn't have the time to update them yet. Any help is appreciated!
Finally, the is_actor trait doesn't seem work for extended actors.Is
there a
workaround for that?
Yes, you need to specialize it for your actor.
Thanks, Paul
_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users