|
Boost : |
From: Valentin Bonnard (Bonnard.V_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-06-11 08:11:01
Beman Dawes wrote:
[ Messy adaptators naming conventions ]
> Functionality Boost Name SGI STL's Name
> f(g(value)) compose11 compose1
> f(g(value),h(value)) compose21 compose2
> f(g(value1),h(value2)) compose22
> f(g(value1,value2)) compose12
> f(g()) compose10
All this mess IMHO leads to:
1) almost unreadable code
2) reduced use of functional programming in C++
I think the only clear solution is to write something
like:
(lambda (f g h) (lambda (x) (f (g x) (h x))))
in Lisp/Scheme style or
(fun f g h x -> f (g x) (h x))
in ML/Caml style.
I think it's _way_ more readable than a bunch
of combinators.
And of course, it isn't on topic for this list, as
support for such things would require a language
extension. I just wanted to see if this kind of idea
got some support here.
-- Valentin Bonnard ------------------------------------------------------------------------ eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/boost http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk