From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-03 18:14:32
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
> It sure would've been nice to be able to write _2.count, or count(_2), or
> _2.count(), but we can't, so we bind(). ;-) The regular syntax has its
> advantages, and the initial "member pointer first" surprise is a one-time
It's an issue of how far the language is, mentally, from the domain
abstraction it represents.
maps more directly to
does. For me.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk