Alexander Nasonov wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
FWIW, we didn't cover as_sequence in the book because we really couldn't come up with a use case that justified the non-uniformity in generic programs. If the type you pass happens to be a sequence already it gets treated differently :(.
I don't quite understand your negative reaction on difference. A lot of things are different :) If you couldn't find a good use case for generic programs, may be we could try find something interesting for "real" (I mean not generic) programs?
I have no opinion if as_sequence should be overloaded this way, or not, but I'd like the function pointer type -> sequence metafunction. As example, I'm working on Boost.Plugin library, and I'd prefer to change the current syntax for describing plugin's constructor arguments: template<> class virtual_constructors<MyBasePluginClass> { typedef mpl::vector< mpl::vector<int>, mpl::vector<double> > type; }; to template<> class virtual_constructors<MyBasePluginClass> { typedef mpl::vector<ctor (int), ctor(double)> type; }; (Where 'ctor' is dummy syntax sugar type). - Volodya