From: Dave Gomboc (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-13 10:01:36
> [about f(g()) where g() returns void]
> > Should we really cripple bind() just because the core language is
> Is it? f() takes zero arguments. The expression list 'g()' contains one
> expression. They are incompatible.
But after computing g(), there are zero arguments to pass on to f(). I'm no
language lawyer, but this method of binding works in functional languages
(and I do tend to think of "void" as similar to Standard ML's "unit"). I
don't see why it shouldn't work in C++ as well. There may well be a reason,
but is it a good one?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk