On May 9, 2007, at 12:13 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
Maurizio Vitale wrote:
Eric Niebler <eric@boost-consulting.com> writes:
Tough questions. You've touched on a weakness of proto. I hope to make improvements in this area after BoostCon ...
I think proto is a very nice addition to boost, and I'm sure with a few touches to make it easier to use for applications different from what it has been designed for it can get rapidly to the point it can be submitted formally.
Fair. This particular area certainly needs improvement. But are you also referring to your desire for something like proto::eval() to work even when you don't have an expression object to evaluate?
No I was not thinking of that, although it seems very easy to support from a first look at the current implementation
I don't consider that a common use case.
I didn't mean to imply that you've to support all I need. That particular feature is probably better done in an application specific way. I've looked at context.hpp and it should very easy to steal from it and I think that way I can accommodate the case when values can be compile-time constants or run-time values (another one of the mails I've sent, where I have a need for two transforms for doing something that should have been simpler. I don't think you've seen it, maybe because of my clock screw-up at the time). The main reason I'm throwing my application specific needs out there is to discover whether there's a proto way to achieve what I need. If there's I'll use it, otherwise it's up to you and others in the boost core team to decide whether something not considered before is general enough for inclusion. Best regards, Maurizio