On 2/3/2011 6:36 PM, Gregory Crosswhite wrote:
Hey everyone,
This e-mail is going to be a case study of my personal experience in converting code using Boost.Local to use Boost.Phoenix instead in order to get insight into the similarities and differences in what the libraries have to offer. I do not claim to have perfect understanding of Boost.Phoenix so I acknowledge that it is entirely possible that any negative experience I may have are due to my ignorance rather than a fault in the library itself. [...many attempted examples...] This doesn't mean that I think that Boost.Phoenix is a bad library. Reading through the documentation I am absolutely amazed at how it can be used to create very expressive functions; the authors have clearly worked very hard on it and should be proud of their work. However, it simply cannot be treated as invaliding the need for something like Boost.Local, because for one to accomplish many of the same tasks in Boost.Phoenix as one can accomplish in Boost.Local one has to deal with a whole lot of extra mental effort and frustration, and the result at the end is often less expressive and clear (and potentially less maintainable) as it would have been if one had used Boost.Local since the body is no longer expressed in standard C++.
I hope that you all find this informative!
Very informative, yes. - Jeff