From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-05-04 07:34:59
From: "Jesse Jones" <jesjones_at_[hidden]>
> No dead weight. The code can call the binder/lambda library directly.
Unnecessary coupling. This will make function.hpp fail regression tests
wherever bind.hpp fails. If I need bind.hpp, I'll include it directly.
> It's just a convenience that is IMO justified by how often people
> will attach member functions to callbacks.
I don't think it's even a convenience. bind() is more convenient than
function<>() for binding member functions to instances because you don't
have to supply a return type and an argument list.
-- Peter Dimov Multi Media Ltd.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk