"Jon Kalb" <jonkalb@microsoft.com> wrote in message news:435B34B617D19D40977CBB72A9C3463801A1F7AD@RED-MSG-53.redmond.corp.microsoft.com...
[...] It is clear that C++ has some form of functional programming in its future and I'm glad we have people of this caliber working on it.
I would just like to reiterate an important point that Joel made that parts of the C++ community don't seem to have gotten yet. FP has been a part of C++ since the STL became a staple of C++ code. In fact, it has been a part of C++ since templates were added, since templates are by nature functional. Anyone who thinks that FP in C++ is just a toy obviously hasn't gotten past "C with classes". I'm not directing this at you Jon, but rather using your statement as an excuse to make a point.
Whatever we end up with in Boost and eventually in the Standard, whether it is a future submission of FC++ or some other approach, it will be better for the work that Brian has done in this version and I think we are indebted to him, Mat, and the library reviewers for their effort.
I second this sentiment, and let me add that accepting FC++ or adding it to the standard won't be "adding FP to C++" any more than accepting MPL amounted to "adding metaprogramming to C++". Rather, it will simply be "adding another tool for a lesser supported paradigm in C++". And since when is having more tools a bad thing? C++ is hard enough without having to reinvent the wheel every time. Dave --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.581 / Virus Database: 368 - Release Date: 2/9/2004