On 24 Nov 2011 20:19:17 Joel de Guzman wrote:
The funny thing is that the new feature came from Spirit, not Phoenix. Phoenix API has been stable for many years now. Triple sheesh for ya! :-)
Then why did V3 require a review earlier this year?
That's because it has been re-implemented from the grounds up in order to make it compatible and a full replacement for boost::lambda, boost::bind and phoenix::v2. But what's your point anyways? I don't see any relation to the original topic.
Phoenix is great if you want things that are easy in a functional programming language to seem easy in C++, but it does have a learning curve. Local requires a little more typing for short snippets, but is probably far less intimidating, and has far fewer potential "gotchas", for the typical user. I don't think the two are competing with each other at all--- Phoenix provides a far richer set of building blocks for those who want them, and Local offers a stable interface, trivial execution model, and straightforward error messages for those who simply want to use a local function here and there. For a non-guru who just wants to reduce code duplication or port something from Delphi, Local is in many cases the more appealing choice.
All of this might be true. But why does Boost.Local have to be in Boost in order to fulfill these promises? Regards Hartmut --------------- http://boost-spirit.com http://stellar.cct.lsu.edu