Re: [boost] Keeping C++ feature discussion on topic for Boost

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-22 08:04:03

From: "Herb Sutter" <hsutter_at_[hidden]>
> >     But it's off topic to have a general "make suggestions for the new
C++
> > language" discussion here.
>
> Indeed, and thanks to you, Dave, and Beman for repeating this. My question
was
> for a list of features "most needed" for writing C++ "libraries ... and
Boost
> in particular."
>
> So far, there have been three such suspects discussed: typedef templates,
> auto, and typeof.

I have to disagree with this. 'auto' is a nice feature that definitely gets
publicity but it's _not_ needed for writing libraries (except for the return
type autodeduction which is solved by typeof.)

In contrast, the 'argument forwarding' problem definitely needs a solution.
As has been repeatedly pointed out, currently there is no practical way to
make a function "forward" to another function its arguments unmodified (i.e.
f(a1, ..., aN) to be equivalent to g(a1, ..., aN).)

In particular, Boost.Bind and Lambda suffer a lot from this C++ limitation.