On 02/12/09 11:52, vicente.botet wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Evans" <cppljevans@suddenlink.net> To: <boost@lists.boost.org> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 6:22 PM Subject: Re: [boost] [mpl] is there a or_seq like logical metafunction?
On 02/10/09 13:21, Larry Evans wrote:
Oh! this is quite interesting. I will try it to see how it works. WHich implementation should perdorms better if any difference? [snip] BTW, what about the while_ template mentioned in my other recent
On 02/10/09 12:45, vicente.botet wrote: [snip] post. It seems that would be most general, and it just uses template recursion and eval_if. If simplified implementation *usually* means faster execution, then maybe while_ would be fastest. I know the non-variadic and_ uses recursion (as I mentioned in my reply to David), so; I don't think that would be a disadvantage. [snip] Aleksey, do you think that it is worth to include them on Boost.MPL?
Thanks Larry, Vicente
Sure. However, IIUC, the recent proposed change to iter_fold_if: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/3044#comment:2 should enable iter_fold_if to be used to do what you want. However, whether that patch to ifer_fold_if is better than a replacement of iter_fold_if with the while_recur mentioned here: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/3044#comment:3 is an open question, IMHO. This questions involved are mentioned near the bottom of: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/190527 However, so far, there doesn't seem to be much interest in while_recur; so, I'm guessing you could get by with Steven's patch to iter_fold_if_impl. -Larry