Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr.-2 wrote
If it's not documented, I don't know what propertiesis_lambda_expression has and what guarantees it makes. Its name suggestssome, I admit, but who knows what the author's intents were? Without someadditional documentation, the code defines its behavior, hence I'd say it'stautologically correct :)I can sympathize if you think the above implies this metafunction should bean auxiliary or detail namespace; I would agree.
I would think (but I don't really know) that having undocumented functions in the main namespaces would itself be a violation of boost policies, even if it worked as expected. On this basis I think I will make a report and see what they say. Even if it was hidden, it seems like horrible style to have is_lambda_expression fail on lambda expressions (there is a documented is_sequence metafunction, and there is an is_placeholder in the mpl namespace that seems to work as expected).
Is this just an FYI, or are you genuinely in need to detecting Boost.MPLlambda expressions?
Yes, there is a need. I want a function to be instantiated according to its template parameters (e.g. one definition if T1 is a lambda_expression and another if T1 is a sequence (or is there overlap?)). -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/mpl-is-lambda-expression-bug-tp4642509p46... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.