Peter Dimov wrote:
Sohail Somani:
Peter Dimov wrote:
Sohail Somani:
Anyway, isn't boost::placeholders too presumptuous?
std::bind's placeholders are defined in namespace std::placeholders.
Those placeholders are really limited and as far as I can tell it would be tough to make them the foundation of anything except bind-like stuff.
If you were to have (say) phoenix placeholders in boost::placeholders, you could still implement bind but the rest of the libraries could use the extra functionality.
That is all very well but doesn't make it quite clear to me what do you suggest. Not move bind's placeholders and leave them global? Move them to a namespace other than boost::placeholders? Something else entirely?
Sorry for not being clear! If the boost::placeholders namespace was to exist, I was suggesting that boost standardize on the placeholders in that namespace. This way, one can add "using namespace boost::placeholders" where there is a lot of binding going on and not worry about whether they should be using lambda's _1 or bind's _1 or phoenix arg1 or whatever else there is now. How many different placeholder libraries are there anyway? Hope that is a bit clearer. -- Sohail Somani http://uint32t.blogspot.com