Re: [boost] What to do about std::binary_function and std::unary_function?

On 6 May 2016 at 03:32, Rainer Deyke wrote:

On 05.05.2016 21:18, Nick Matteo wrote:

...

3) A modification of approach 2: instead of manually adding the typedefs everywhere, make a base class to provide the typedefs somewhere in Boost. Then replace inheritance from std::binary_function with inheritance from boost::binary_function.

3a) Provide boost::binary_function, which inherits std::binary_function if it is available, and reimplements std::binary_function otherwise.

I disagree. The standard is getting rid of them for good reason. Boost should too. -- Nevin ":-)" Liber > +1-847-691-1404