From: Jim Argeropoulos (jaa_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-01-15 16:38:38
> This is the fault of the definition of logical_and/logical_not.
I realize that.
> > Second, few practicing programmers are going to figure it out. If we
> > a solution I would like to see some helper functions for it. Of the 30
> > programmers I work with I would only expect one other to ever figure
> > to put compose_f_gx_hy() to use on their own. Its just too abstract for
> > them. Maybe in a few years, but not today. Those who partake in this
> > list think at a different level than the average programmer.
> You have a good point. The right implementation approach would be to
> use the compose library to implement your library. A few typedefs and
> some small functions would be all that it would take. Also such
> an implementation would be a good resource for people to look at and
> learn about programming with functors.
If you look at the end of my submission, I have an attempt to get arround
the logical_X problem by creating a set of objects I called
BinaryPredicateAndComposer and BinaryPredicateOrComposer. It failed with the
same error that compose_f_gx_hy failed.
I will put together some code if someone is willing to do some testing for
me. I have no way to know if it is correct given my compiler(gcc on Be)
won't compile it.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk