Tarjei Knapstad
Ahh, it was the ::type requests which I didn't have a sufficient understanding for. I've solved it for now by specializing my class template for an empty sequence (I had a look at the Lambda stuff, but it involved quite a bit more than the specialization so I've postponed it)
If that's the only change you made, I guess I'd say... ick. Why not use the nice fold invocation I gave you instead? But, to each his own.
Oh, and please, do yourself a favor and follow the MPL metafunction protocol! That means your result is called "::type", not "::Type".
Yes, but this goes againts our own coding standards unfortunately (all types are captialized). I'm considering a modification to our standards though, in that stuff that models STL concepts (like iterators etc.) should be named like they are in the STL. I'm still undecided on what will end up being less confusing...
It's less about confusability than about interoperability. If your template is an MPL metafunction you can use it in lambda expressions, with apply_if, etc. Otherwise, you can't.
On a sidenote, I seem to remember from the ACCU conf. in Oxford this year that you were preparing a book on the MPL? Is it in it's early stages, or do you have any rough date for it's completion? (It certainly looks like I could need a copy ;) )
It's in its early-middle stages. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com