From: Daniel Wallin (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-22 14:49:09
David Abrahams wrote:
> on Tue Mar 20 2007, "Daniel Walker" <daniel.j.walker-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
>> These patches do not need to be applied in any particular order.
>> Applying all three has the effect of making lazy binding behave more
>> like the description in the documentation. I ran the Boost Parameter
>> Library test suite and everything passed. Let me know if I've
>> misunderstood something or if there's a better way to solve this
>> problem or if you'd like additional documentation/tests.
> I don't have any suggestions, though maybe Daniel W. does.
I think in general a better solution would be to add a member function
to the keyword class template. Maybe:
template <class F>
... lazy(F const& f)
And possibly change the docs to not use Boost.Lambda. We're going to hit
the same problem with the every lambda library. Changing the
implementation is to late for 1.34, but we should probably change the
docs so they don't mention Lambda. The example would become:
bind(std::plus<std::string>(), ref(s1), ref(s2))
it's unfortunate, but not that bad IMO.
-- Daniel Wallin Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk