Re: [boost] [result_of] const-qualified function?

From: shunsuke (pstade.mb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-01-27 06:04:32

Peter Dimov wrote:
> shunsuke wrote:
>> Hi, gurus.
>>
>> I have one question about 'result_of':
>>
>>
>> template<class F>
>> struct forward
>> {
>>    template<class A>
>>    // typename boost::result_of<F(A&)>::type // (1)
>>    typename boost::result_of<F const(A&)>::type // (2)
>>    operator()(A& a) const
>>    {
>>        return m_f(a);
>>    }
>>
>>    explicit forward(F f) : m_f(f)
>>    { }
>>
>> private:
>>    F m_f;
>> };
>>
>>
>> (1) or (2).. which is right?
> 
> (2) is right because m_f is const in operator().
> 
>> In fact, (2) fails to compile if 'F' is a function pointer type;
>> because const function-pointer specialization is missing.
> 
> This is a bug in boost::result_of.

Hmm, the result_of revolution is painful...
Thanks!

-- 
Shunsuke Sogame