Steven Watanabe wrote:
Can't you use result_of?
As far as I can see, the current boost::result_of implementation doesn't use decltype or typeof. I suppose implementing decltype on top of typeof is not a big problem (you only need to check whether the expression is a reference or not) however both have problems with mangling when used in a return type, at least in GCC. That basically means you can't always rely on them working. I thought decltype didn't have those mangling problems, looks like it is a regression. As for the correct way to do that, I suppose it should be possible to tell boost::result_type with a macro definition to use Boost.Typeof, which in turn can use either native or emulation. However range_ex only forwards algorithms and adaptors to Boost.Iterator and maybe the standard library. Maybe it's these that ought to use boost::result_of in the first place?