On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Thomas Heller <thom.heller@googlemail.com> wrote:
On Friday 23 July 2010 15:59:46 Robert Jones wrote:
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Thomas Heller
<thom.heller@googlemail.com>wrote:
Ladies and Gentlemen, I proudly announce that the port of phoenix3 is completed! All testcases pass! (some with minor modifications)
Great News!! [...]
With Boost.Proto we have the unique possibilty to (more or less) easily introspect our pheonix expression and do lots of cool stuff with it.
Is Phoenix finally compatible with result_of instead of using its own protocol?
Boost.Bind - The competitor of phoenix::bind: Boost.Bind exists for a long time now. phoenix::bind shall be completely compatible to Boost.Bind (API wise). However it shall not replace Boost.Bind, because Boost.Bind has some advantages over phoenix::bind (compile time, legacy compiler support).
but phoenix::bind is polymorphic like std::bind, while boost::bind is still monomorphic, right?
Boost.Lambda - The predecessor of Boost.Phoenix: Boost.Lambda is the one library which inspired to Joel de Guzman to build Phoenix in the first place. It shares many similarities, but phoenix is built upon more modern concepts. IIUC, the plan was to deprecate Boost.Lambda at some point in favor of phoenix. Some needs to clarify this a bit more.
As far as I remember from the review, it was decided that Phoenix would just replace boost.lambda (except that boost.lambda would be kept for backward compatibility for some releases); keeping compatibility with the Lambda api was hard and just not worth it.
C++0x lambdas - The competitor of Boost.Phoenix:
as long as C++0x lambdas stay monomorphic, there is really no competition :D. Great job! -- gpd