|
Boost : |
From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-12-27 17:00:54
On Thursday, December 27, 2001, at 07:57 AM, Peter Dimov wrote:
> From: "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_[hidden]>
>> On Wednesday, December 26, 2001, at 09:27 AM, Peter Dimov wrote:
>>
>>> From: "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_[hidden]>
>>>> I can infer that bind objects passed as arguments to bind (other
>>>> than the
>>>> first), are evaluated when the outer bind is called, and the results
>>>> are used in place of the bind objects themselves.
>>
>> I still think that mentioning "the
>> nesting rules" when there is only one rule and it is never even
>> described as such is confusing, but hey, maybe I'm in the minority.
>
> Oh well, I agree with you. I simply need to know what makes my
> explanation
> inadequate; is it only the inappropriate use of "nesting rules" or
> there is
> something else as well.
It's hard to say without seeing the new text, but I think if you handle
the nesting rules issue it will go a long way.
>> The example is sufficiently hard to grok without this little twist. Is
>> it possible to strip the example down so that it is much clearer what
>> you are saying?
>
> I think that the example is a bit too abstract and stripped down. I'll
> try
> to think of a better one.
Thanks!
-Dave
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk