RE: [boost] Re: compose_f_gxy_hxy

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-26 10:08:01

Daniel Frey wrote:
> Peter Dimov wrote:
> > You've considered
> > 
> > bind(f, bind(g, _1, _2), bind(h, _1, _2))
> > 
> > right? ;-)
> 
> Sure. But still compose.hpp is in itself incomplete. And it completes 
> the standard's parts on function objects so I think it might be 
> desirable to supply compose_f_gxy_hxy. 

The standard is moving towards 'bind' -
http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2003/n1455.htm.

> If we take bind into account here, we could just as well remove
> compose.hpp completly, couldn't we? 

We might, in a couple of years. Seriously, 'bind' is superior here; it
takes some learning to switch over from the 'compose_*' family, but it's
worth it.

Aleksey