Peter Dimov wrote:
Marcus Lindblom wrote:
In the bind()-cases, it uses mem_fn to call the actual function:
template<class C> template<class T, typename A1, typename A2> void ScriptClassImpl<C>::ElemBinder::bind(void (T::*f)(A1, A2), const char* n1, const char* n2) { BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT((::boost::is_base_and_derived<T, C>::value||::boost::is_same<T, C>::value));
typedef boost::function<void (T&, A1, A2)> func_type; *m_f = xml::mkApplyElemFunctor<func_type>(boost::mem_fn(f), *m_log).arg(n1).arg(n2); }
Sounds sensible, although you can use something like
*m_f = boost::bind( f, _1,
boost::bind( getArg<A1>, _2, n1 ), boost::bind( getArg<A2>, _2, n2 ) );
here.
Hmm. Yup, that might be possible. I'll have to think about it. :)
I'm somewhat reluctant to introduce features into boost::mem_fn since std::tr1::mem_fn and the upcoming std::mem_fn don't/won't have them. If you start using ::argN_type, you won't be able to switch to std::mem_fn once it becomes available. Of course if this is not a concern for the Boost community we can easily add the typedefs and the arity.
Valid point. Perhaps function_traits could be extended to handle all type of function objects as well as regular functions, somehow? Cheers, /Marcus