Re: [boost] Lambda library - comparison with FACT and other solutions?

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-18 08:24:06

From: <nbecker_at_[hidden]>
> I haven't look at any of the technical issues, but from a purely
> esthetic view I prefer the familiar, explicit "lambda(x, y, x + y)".

Sometimes the choice is not so clear-cut.

std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), std::cout << _1 << '\n');

vs

std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), lambda(x, std::cout << x << '\n'));

In general, I find that every non-pure-functional use looks better with the
_N syntax; lambda() implies a pure function as far as I'm concerned.