5 Nov
2004
5 Nov
'04
12:50 p.m.
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
Of course f = t; is merely a shorthand way of spelling f = boost::lambda::constant(t), but a dependency on lambda isn't always desirable.
Thoughts?
By the same token, one could argue that this functionality ought to be pushed into boost::bind.
I'm not sure what you mean. What functionality ought to be pushed into boost::bind?
The ability to build an always(whatever) function object: f = boost::bind(t); -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com