On 4/12/2010 4:02 PM, Daniel Walker wrote: <snip>
I agree with the priorities you've expressed, and I'm glad you've pressed the issue here and on CWG. I think we're coming to a better understanding of things, now, and we can continue ironing out these issues after 1.43.
Right! And thank you for volunteering to maintain result_of. Your efforts are truly appreciated. One of the things we'll need to work out post-1.43 is if our migration plan is sound. It necessarily means that, until all supported compilers have decltype, boost::result_of will have a split personality: decltype on some platforms, TR1 protocol on others. If we decide that's acceptable, or can't come up with a better alternative, one of the things you as maintainer will have to do is to help people deal with this result_of two-step. That will involve exploring the nasty corner cases, coming up with developer guidelines, educating people, improving the documentation (which at this point is pretty paltry), etc, etc. You may even have to submit patches to other Boost libraries to bring them into compliance with your new guidelines. Of course, the boost community, myself included, are here to help. -- Eric Niebler BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com