AMDG Eric Niebler wrote:
- Does ``and_< T0,T1, ... Tn >`` *really* only apply ``T``\ *n*?
Yes. It can't apply all the transforms. The result of applying the first transform might have a type that the second transform can't make sense of. Transforms don't chain that way.
They could be chained by and_, could they not?
No, not in any meaningful way. Consider:
and_< when<G1, T1> ,when<G2, T2>
T1 requires that any expression passed to it matches G1. Likewise for T2 and G2. Now, imagine that the result of applying T1 is some type that *doesn't* match G2 ... it might not even be an expression! If you tried to pass it to T2, you would be violating T2's preconditions. T2's transform will likely fail.
How about passing it the _state parameter? In Christ, Steven Watanabe