Re: [boost] Lambda library - comparison with FACT and other solutions?

From: Jaakko Jarvi (jajarvi_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-18 10:22:06

> > I haven't look at any of the technical issues, but from a purely
> > esthetic view I prefer the familiar, explicit "lambda(x, y, x + y)".
> 
> Sometimes the choice is not so clear-cut.
> 
> std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), std::cout << _1 << '\n');
> 
> vs
> 
> std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), lambda(x, std::cout << x << '\n'));
> 
> In general, I find that every non-pure-functional use looks better with the
> _N syntax; lambda() implies a pure function as far as I'm concerned.
> 

The difference is really just syntactical. 
Even with lambda(x, y, ...) the variables x and y are still predefined 
placeholder names, defined by the FACT library, not real formal parameter
names.

Jaakko