Re: [Boost-users] Why is cref required in this nested bind example?

On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Nathan Crookston wrote:

...

//bind(b, bind(a));//*1 bind(b, cref(bind(a)));//*2

In short, *1 is evaluating a()

Thank you. This surprises me as I thought boost::bind returned an object of type boost::function. I need to understand this better and am about to go read more on this.

It would be more idiomatic to use protect:

bind(b, boost::protect(bind(a)))

I made the change, thank you. Hopefully when I understand better what boost::bind is doing (i.e. not returning a boost::function) it will be obvious why I need boost::protect. My guess is that boost::protect converts whatever boost::bind does return into a boost::function. Thanks again, Chris