Re: [boost] FC++ integration/future issues (was "Some FC++ comments")

From: Joel Young (jdy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-15 13:44:20

From: Brian McNamara <lorgon_at_[hidden]>
> to think deeply about it though; it is unclear to me if the FC++
> implicit assumption of 'value semantics' (FC++ doesn't allow (mutable)
> reference parameters) will throw a wrench in the works.  It is also

I tried using FC++ a while ago for flexibly expressing and passing
around linear algebra pipelines and I found this lack of mutable
reference parameters to be highly constraining and insanely frustrating.
I wanted to be able to take a reference to a vector as a parameter and
return that same vector, mutated, as a return value.  I started to hack
FC++ to remove the const on the references but after a bit gave up.

My functional programmer office mate just laughed at me.  

Pure functional lack of mutation is nice and all but...

Joel