Re: [boost] boost::result_of and C++03

7 Apr 2008

      Eric Niebler wrote:
...
...
Let me clarify.
This identity implementation is simply wrong (if you pass an rvalue to identity.)
because of inconsistency between decltype and result_of.
Am I missing anything?
I don't think so. If I have an rvalue, I compute the return type and 
invoke the function as follows:
result_of<identity(int)>::type i = identity()(1);
This is perfectly safe. If I have an lvalue, it looks like this:
int const i = 0;
   result_of<identity(int const &)>::type j = identity()(i);
Also perfectly safe.
Hmm, result_of must be consistent with decltype, IMO.
It seems not "safety" but "mathematics". :-)

How about this? :

result_of<identity(int)>::type // doh in C++0x.
test()
{
     return identity()(3);
}

Regards,

-- 
Shunsuke Sogame

Re: [boost] boost::result_of and C++03

shunsuke