|
Boost : |
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-01 08:57:25
Alexander Nasonov wrote:
> Key difference between my interface and Joel's is that
> Joel sets overloads individually:
>
> f.set<0>(&foo1);
> f.set<1>(&foo2);
> f.set<2>(&foo3);
> f.set<3>(&foo4);
>
> while I expect a single functor supporting all overloads:
>
> _1 + 1;
>
> or
>
> struct f {
> int operator(int) const;
> double operator(double) const;
> };
Yep. Both has its uses. I believe Alexander's code accepts only
polymorphic functions. So, you can also use 'overloads' to
gather the monomorphic functions and feed that to Alexander's.
Cool stuff Alexander! I'd like to use dynamic_any in the
lisp/scheme interpreter I'll be writing as an example for
spirit2.
Regards,
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk