From: David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com>
Rob Stewart <stewart@sig.com> writes:
From: David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com>
Rob Stewart <stewart@sig.com> writes:
From: David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com>
Rob Stewart <stewart@sig.com> writes:
Is the _ member needed?
It is if you're going to support
all_of(a) , all_of(b)
just the same way as you'd support
all_of(a) > all_of(b)
Why would we need that? I don't see a use case for it.
Generality.
The concept we're working on provides for logical comparisons of ranges of values resulting in a Boolean. I see no use case for other operators.
What about this:
all_of(a)@frobnicates@any_of(b)
That only needs, using the type names from my library,
Needs what? A new language that supports the @ character?
Surely you understood I was using "@" as a placeholder for any overloadable, binary operator.
No I didn't. And stop calling me Surely.
I just assumed it would be obvious. Clearly I was wrong.
Anyway, that suffers the same issue as the comma. for which operators will
all_of(a) @ any_of(b)
be unsupported?
Given that I see no need for any operator other than ==, !=, <, >, <=, or >=, that leaves great latitude. -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;