2011/8/31 Agustín K-ballo Bergé <kaballo86@hotmail.com>
On 01/09/2011 1:29, Gordon Woodhull wrote:
I was hoping that there was a way to paste together a bunch of function objects as if they were function overloads.
Create a new class that keeps references to all such function objects, and implements implicit conversions to each of them. Then you can use an instance of this class as an "overloaded function object".
Wouldn't that result in a conversion ambiguity? How would the compiler know which function object to implicitly convert to when invoking operator()? I would imagine a generic and safe way to do what Gordon is asking is possible via Eric's can_be_called machinery. operator() for the wrapping function object checks which of the child function objects "can_be_called" with the given arguments, and if precisely one match, dispatches to the matching child, else errors. Less safe but more flexible is to just choose the first child function object that matches. - Jeff