From: Brock Peabody (brock.peabody_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-24 08:31:44
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
> On Behalf Of Powell, Gary
> Right, what is the return type of the execution of a for_loop? Why "void"
> so you can't assign the result of a for loop to a lambda variable.
> Makes No sense: _1 = for_loop(,,,)
Yep, I don't know what I was thinking :)
> BTW: lambda works with boost::function! You can build a lambda statement
> and store it in a boost:function! Pretty cool eh? You have Doug G. to
> thank for that.
That is sweet. I was also pleasantly surprised to find that things like:
Work just like you want them to!
Now I'm trying to figure out how to make it so my function objects are
while (!make_my_condition_function()) [body];
I've about got it figured out by looking at code, but would lambda::bind be
the normal way to do it?
But it makes me wonder if all the world's function objects shouldn't make
themselves lambda compatible. boost::function comes to mind, for instance,
but it already has a meaning for many operators.