Re: [boost] Re: First lambda

From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-03 22:29:50

Jonathan Turkanis wrote:

> "Shannon Stewman" <stew_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:20040304025205.GD832_at_uchicago.edu...
> 
>>On Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 01:34:50PM -0800, Powell, Gary wrote:
>>
>>
>>>unsigned long n = std::accumulate(
>>>      xs.begin(), xs.end(), 0UL,
>>>          long (long lhs, X const &rhs)     // inline fn with no
> 
> name.
> 
>>>          {
>>>              return lhs + rhs.count;
>>>          }
>>>      );
>>
>>This seems to cast out the type inference present in BLL.  I think
>>that's one of the nicer concepts in the lambda library, and a real
>>boon to programming.  In my limited experience with SML/OCaml, type
>>inference seems a better, safer, and more convenient way to program,
>>albeit requiring a lot more compiler intelligence.  As BLL shows,
> 
> though,
> 
>>this is quite possible, though perhaps limited, with existing C++.
>>
> 
> 
> How about:
> 
>     unsigned long n = std::accumulate(
>           xs.begin(), xs.end(), 0UL,
>               auto(long lhs, const auto& rhs)     // inline fn with no
> name.
>               {
>                   return lhs + rhs.count;
>               }
>           );

I would prefer also eliding the argument types:

     unsigned long n = std::accumulate(
           xs.begin(), xs.end(), 0UL,
               lambda(lhs, rhs)
               {
                   return lhs + rhs.count;
               }
           );

Most of the time, you also do not know the type of the
arguments before hand.

-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net