pt., 2 kwi 2021 o 18:28 Peter Dimov via Boost
Andrzej Krzemienski wrote:
Maybe Boost.Lambda2 could also provide its own thin wrapper for std::bind which returns a type from namespace boost::lambda2
I think (and hope) that this won't be necessary.
By the way, one advantage of Lambda2 defining its own placeholders would be that they will now be usable as function objects. The need for just _1 or _2 as a lambda is surprisingly common and it's an annoyance that they don't work.
Another advantage would be the ability to supply operator[], which must be a member. This will allow things like _1[x] or _1[0] < _1[1] to work. (Barry needed _1[x] for his zip_view implementation.)
Sure. This will however set the expect\tion bar even higher, and now one can ask if you could provide the function call operator in the same way. But I guess this is impossible.
So, Andrzej, provided we have an agreement on the need for Lambda2 to provide its own placeholders instead of importing the standard ones, does this change your opinion on whether the library needs to be rejected?
Yes, it does. I change my recommendation to conditionally accept Boost.Lambda2; the condition being to provide its own placeholders. Regards, &rzej;
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost