"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
I'd think that this is the right expectation for Lambda, but not for FC++ or Bind. Not that I'm helping any :)
No, I don't think so. Expressions that are valid for both Bind and Lambda should have the same semantics. And in fact, this is not just theory:
Really? I didn't figure out what the code illustrates, but my recent attempts to use Lambda have been a dismal failure, mostly because of subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) differences with Bind. For example, Lambda doesn't seem to support get_pointer to dereference through smart pointers. The tuple/reference issue I posted about yesterday was another obstacle. I'm rather discouraged with how difficult it is to use standard algorithms -- or even algorithms over sequences as opposed to iterators -- to write something that could be coded quickly using dumb loops. I hold out some hope that the long-promised integration of Lambda and Phoenix will help to solve these problems, but it's hard to tell when (or if) that's actually coming. Glum in Somerville, Dave