On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Joel de Guzman <djowel@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/5/2012 10:32 AM, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Joel de Guzman <djowel@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9/5/2012 9:03 AM, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Joel de Guzman <djowel@gmail.com>
wrote:
The question is: should we allow SFINAE for result_of. I think now
that we should.
Wouldn't this create a portability problem between C++03 and C++11?
Or are you suggesting this for C++11-only code? Or are you suggesting to likewise modify result_of in C++03 to allow SFINAE, via something like Eric's can_be_called metafunction?
I don't know. I will not have enough time to follow through with this anyway so I'll leave it to the result_of people to "do the right thing". In any case, I can work out a solution/workaround.
You can't just make a proposal and then crawl back in your cave :)
I am not making a proposal.
"The question is: should we allow SFINAE for result_of. I think now that we should." I took that to be a proposal. In any case, it looks like Daniel has taken a stab at it. I'm not sure if such behavior should be added to result_of itself or....maybe an entirely different utility should be created, e.g., enable_result_of or sfinae_result_of. - Jeff