On Sep 5, 2012, at 6:56 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 9/6/12 1:00 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
On 9/5/2012 12:14 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 9/5/12 11:33 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
I'm not sure. To me, I think it's easier to simply avoid result_of on C++11 and just use decltype directly. Problem solved. Why use an inferior tool when something better is available anyway?
In the case where you need an overload to drop out because of the ill-formed-ness of a call expression, I agree with you. If you mean to swear off using result_of entirely because of this issue, then you'd be making your code non-portable for no good reason.
How so? I can keep using result_of in '03 code and use decltype in '11 code. I see no reason how that will be non-portable.
I mean that you can use boost::result_of everywhere except where you need to select overloads on
So avoiding result_of == non-portable ?
result_of buys you some portability in so far as it can work in C++03 whereas decltype is purely a creature of C++11. result_of is also convenient for the common case where you just want to use perfect forwarding; e.g. it's less tedious and more readable than writing long strings of declvals wrapping your arguments inside the decltype.
PS> If you stop acting like the police, perhaps more people will stop behaving like renegades ;-)
The winky-face here doesn't make that comment acceptable. Since when is maintaining a library "acting like the police"? Let me remind you: we're here because you've been neglecting the maintenance of your own libraries, Phoenix and Fusion, which have been broken by the decltype-result_of on trunk since APRIL.
That tone is exactly my point ;-) And yes, that's another winky face.
I feel like the thread is degenerating into an xkcd cartoon... which isn't necessarily a bad thing. :-) - Daniel