Dave,
r | transform(f) | filter(g) | whatever(h) = whatever(filter(transform(r, f), g, h))
why this way around? Why not whatever( h, filter(g, transform(f, r) ) which I don't find much worse than the operator| notation, and it works consistently with anything that expects functions, boost::bind, boost::function, whatever other people have already implemented that invokes operator(). I agree with Rogier that I don't see why ranges are so different from doubles, say, that would warrant introducing a new syntax. And wouldn't concepts in C++0x allow augmenting Ranges with things that can be invoked method-style, like r.transform(f).filter(g).whatever(h) ? Arno -- Dr. Arno Schoedl · aschoedl@think-cell.com Technical Director think-cell Software GmbH · Invalidenstr. 34 · 10115 Berlin, Germany http://www.think-cell.com · phone +49-30-666473-10 · toll-free (US) +1-800-891-8091 Directors: Dr. Markus Hannebauer, Dr. Arno Schoedl · Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 85229