On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. <jhellrung@ucla.edu> wrote:
On 8/22/2010 6:01 PM, OvermindDL1 wrote:
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Mathieu -<ptr.jetable@gmail.com> wrote:
I might be totally wrong here but I don't see how it's different from lambdas...
What can it do differently from boost::phoenix? I am guessing you just create and instance a struct right there, but boost::phoenix would be more succinct.
Except Boost.Phoenix isn't as expressive as "real" C++, is it? E.g., local variables are somewhat clumsy (opinion) in the current incarnation of Boost.Phoenix.
Also, it seems reasonable to implement BOOST_LOCAL_FUNCTION in terms of lambdas if they exist, but perhaps one would want to use local functions on non-lambda-enabled compilers.
True, local variable do require a unique construct, but that construct takes even less space then declaring multiple variables anyway (since essentially all variables in phoenix can be treated as 'auto'). And boost::phoenix does not use C++1x functionality, so it works on C98 compilers just fine, no C++ lambda's