From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-19 06:56:04
David Abrahams wrote:
> Interesting. Like Dirk, I too am wondering what the point is, beyond
> syntactic sugar.
What is the point of what exactly? Of yet another lambda notation? Of round
brackets? Of my post? :)
Anyway, there wasn't much of the point besides demonstrating that something
like this is easily implementable and could have some practical use - may be
outside the MPL as well. After all, people has been complaining about "ugly
template brackets" for years ;).
> I notice the namespace "mpl::v2_1" in the code.
Yes, I needed a separate scope to put things into to avoid conflicts as all
new lambda's arguments are metafunction classes, not metafunctions. It (the
namespace) doesn't carry much of intent besides that :).
> Shouldn't we have completed MPL documentation before moving on to
> things like this?
FWIW, I am not moving on to anything. I coded up the above in ~1 hour as a
proof of a sudden idea that seemed like a novel and viable technique.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk